MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975962400 · doi:10.1080/10824000009480530

Lacunarity for Spatial Heterogeneity Measurement in GIS

2000· article· en· W1975962400 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of GIS · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLacunarityGrayscaleFractalFractal analysisScale (ratio)Computer scienceBox countingSpatial analysisFractal dimensionMeasure (data warehouse)Artificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Data miningRemote sensingMathematicsPixelCartographyGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract As a scale dependent measure of heterogeneity, lacunarity has been applied to the analysis of structures in both fractals and non-fractals. In this paper, the lacunarity concept and some lacunarity estimation methods are briefly described, then a Lacunarity Analysis extension for ArcView GIS (ESRI) is introduced. Using binary and grayscale images, several examples are also given for lacunarity analysis of spatial heterogeneity. Experiments with gray-scale image textures show that a new lacunarity estimation method can provide more accurate heterogeneity measurement than some existing methods. The results suggest that lacunarity analysis is a promising tool for spatial heterogeneity measurement in a GIS environment.

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.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.892
Threshold uncertainty score0.284

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.117
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.191 · 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