MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1966113892 · doi:10.5589/m02-062

Deforestation estimation for Canada under the Kyoto Protocol: A design study

2002· article· en· W1966113892 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Donald G. Leckie, Mark D. Gillis

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Remote Sensing · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeforestation (computer science)Thematic MapperGeographyKyoto ProtocolGreenhouse gasThematic mapRemote sensingSatellite imageryCarbon stockEnvironmental resource managementEstimationCarbon accountingLand useScale (ratio)Climate changeEnvironmental scienceCartographyEngineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deforestation is a persistently important issue locally, nationally, and internationally. It is of interest to the public, foresters, environmental organizations, and governments, yet it is difficult to obtain reliable estimates of its extent and nature. Climate change and the role of forests has given a large impetus for formalizing reporting on deforestation. Under the proposed Kyoto Protocol, industrialized nations are required to report on the carbon consequences of deforestation and include them in their greenhouse gas emissions accounting. Canada must develop measurement systems to report on the area of deforestation and the carbon stock loss. Possible data sources include the new plot-based National Forest Inventory (NFI), land use records, and satellite remote sensing. The NFI is a network of 2 × 2 km plots at a 20 km spacing for which land cover and stand attributes are interpreted from medium-scale aerial photography. In this study, medium-resolution satellite imagery, such as Landsat Thematic Mapper (TM), was explored as a potential tool for deforestation estimation and a survey of available land use records was conducted. Factors affecting the utility of each data source and various system design options were examined. An integrated system is suggested that utilizes the NFI as a base, augmented by satellite remote sensing plots and supported by local records as appropriate.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.881
Threshold uncertainty score0.375

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations17
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Remote SensingSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207