MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1991006525 · doi:10.1117/12.738546

Mountain pine beetle detection and monitoring: evaluation of airborne imagery

2007· article· en· W1991006525 on OpenAlexafffund
A. Roberts, Christopher Bone, Suzana Dragićević, Aviv Ettya, Jessie B. Northrup, R. Reich

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Insect Ecology and Management
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersMinistry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations
KeywordsMultispectral imageRemote sensingMountain pine beetleContext (archaeology)Aerial photographyEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceSatellite imageryGeographyForestryArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The processing and evaluation of digital airborne imagery for detection, monitoring and modeling of mountain pine beetle (MPB) infestations is evaluated. The most efficient and reliable remote sensing strategy for identification and mapping of infestation stages ("current" to "red" to "grey" attack) of MPB in lodgepole pine forests is determined for the most practical and cost effective procedures. This research was planned to specifically enhance knowledge by determining the remote sensing imaging systems and analytical procedures that optimize resource management for this critical forest health problem. Within the context of this study, airborne remote sensing of forest environments for forest health determinations (MPB) is most suitably undertaken using multispectral digitally converted imagery (aerial photography) at scales of 1:8000 for early detection of current MPB attack and 1:16000 for mapping and sequential monitoring of red and grey attack. Digital conversion should be undertaken at 10 to 16 microns for B&W multispectral imagery and 16 to 24 microns for colour and colour infrared imagery. From an "operational" perspective, the use of twin mapping-cameras with colour and B&W or colour infrared film will provide the best approximation of multispectral digital imagery with near comparable performance in a competitive private sector context (open bidding).

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)0.002
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations1
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE→Same topicForest Insect Ecology and Management→French-language works237,207→