MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1848181198 · doi:10.1139/er-2013-0006

Monitoring and estimating drought-induced impacts on forest structure, growth, function, and ecosystem services using remote-sensing data: recent progress and future challenges

2013· article· en· W1848181198 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Yao Zhang, Changhui Peng, Weizhong Li, Xiuqin Fang, Tinglong Zhang, Qiuan Zhu, Huai Chen, Pengxiang Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Reviews · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Drought Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of China
KeywordsEcosystem servicesRemote sensingEnvironmental scienceEcosystemClimate changeEnvironmental resource managementCarbon sequestrationForest ecologySatelliteTemporal scalesGeographyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.884
Threshold uncertainty score0.964

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.232 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations81
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental ReviewsSame topicHydrology and Drought AnalysisFrench-language works237,207