MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1980435114 · doi:10.5589/m05-029

Evaluation of RADARSAT-1 images acquired in fine mode for the study of boreal peatlands: a case study in James Bay, Canada

2005· article· en· W1980435114 on OpenAlexfundvenueaboutno aff
Marie-Josée Racine, Monique Bernier, Taha B. M. J. Ouarda

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Remote Sensing · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les TechnologiesUniversité du Québec à Montréal
KeywordsPeatForestryGeographySynthetic aperture radarRemote sensingCartographyPhysical geographyBorealEnvironmental scienceArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As part of a wider study of carbon cycling in boreal peatlands, radar remote sensing was used with the objective of obtaining diverse environmental information related to these peatland areas. This paper presents a case study of three peatlands located in the La Grande River watershed, Quebec, Canada. An analysis of multitemporal fine-mode RADARSAT-1 images was carried out, with the support of collected field data, to verify if hydrological conditions influence radar backscatter coefficients. Changes in hydrological conditions are reflected in the radar backscatter coefficient for areas having low and sparse trees. A maximum likelihood classification (MLC) on speckle-filtered images and textures was also carried out, evaluated, and compared with a similar classification procedure on standard-mode images. MLC using textures generated from multitemporal fine-mode images gave poorer results than a similar classification using multitemporal standard-mode textural images (35% versus 59% of overall accuracy using 10 classes and 37% versus 74% of overall accuracy using four classes).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.300
Threshold uncertainty score0.603

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations20
Published2005
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Remote SensingSame topicPeatlands and Wetlands EcologyFrench-language works237,207