Monitoring and estimating drought-induced impacts on forest structure, growth, function, and ecosystem services using remote-sensing data: recent progress and future challenges
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alongside global warming, droughts are expected to increase in frequency, severity, and extent in the near future, which will likely result in significant impacts on forest growth, production, structure, composition, and ecosystem services. However, due to spatial and temporal characteristics, it is difficult to monitor and assess the potential effects of droughts. Remote sensing can provide an effective way to obtain real-time conditions of forests affected by drought and offer a range of spatial and temporal insights into drought-induced changes to forest ecosystem structure, function, and services. Remote sensing is rapidly developing as more satellites are launched. In situ and remotely sensed data fusion techniques have achieved notable success in assessing drought-induced damage to forests and carbon cycles. Even so, constraints still exist when using satellite data. The objectives of this review are to (1) briefly review existing data sources and methods of remote sensing; (2) synthesize current applications and contributions of remote sensing in monitoring and estimating impacts of droughts on forest ecosystems; and (3) highlight research gaps and future challenges.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".