MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1983982900 · doi:10.14358/pers.75.8.941

The Land-cover Change Mapper (LCM) and its Application to Timber Harvest Monitoring in Western Canada

2009· article· en· W1983982900 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Guillermo Castilla, Richard Guthrie, Geoffrey J. Hay

Bibliographic record

VenuePhotogrammetric Engineering & Remote Sensing · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing in Agriculture
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsLand coverGeographyForestryThematic MapperCover (algebra)Forest coverRemote sensingCartographyLand useChange analysisPhysical geographyEcologySatellite imageryEngineeringBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce an automated change detection and delineation tool for remote sensing images: the Land-cover Change Mapper (LCM). LCM rapidly generates a polygon vector layer (shapefile) of regions deemed to have undergone significant change in land-cover. In its simplest usage, LCM requires two single band or multi-band co-registered images of the same scene acquired at different dates, and as the only user-defined parameter, the minimum size for change regions. The main advantages of this tool are that (a) it is fully unsupervised, (b) it is exceptionally fast, (c) it is robust to geometric misregistration errors and variations in illumination, and (d) it produces visually pleasing outlines that resemble those obtained through manual digitization. We describe how the tool works, illustrate its application to monitoring forest clear-cuts on a 1,000 km 2 area in Western Canada using SPOT imagery, compare it to a commercial tool, and report on its thematic and spatial accuracy. A freeware LCM version is available on the Internet.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations19
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhotogrammetric Engineering & Remote SensingSame topicRemote Sensing in AgricultureFrench-language works237,207