MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1992858570 · doi:10.1109/whispers.2011.6080878

Helicopter high resolution imaging spectroscopy: Mapping species variation

2011· article· en· W1992858570 on OpenAlexaff
D.G. Goodenough, Geofrey S. Quinn, K. OlafNiemann, Hao Chen, Diana Par Ton

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing in Agriculture
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of VictoriaNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCryptomeriaRemote sensingHyperspectral imagingEnvironmental scienceLidarCanopyImaging spectrometerImaging spectroscopyImage resolutionSpectral resolutionSpectrometerSpectroscopySequoiaAcaciaGeologyJaponicaOpticsGeographySpectral lineEcologyBotanyPhysicsArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A unique high spatial and spectral resolution airborne imaging spectrometer dataset was collected concurrently with a high resolution lidar system and orthophotography from a test site on the north eastern slope of Mauna Kea on the island of Hawaii. Ground reference data were collected including a survey of tree locations, species, and foliar chemistry. Wet lab analysis indicated unique chemical signatures exist for three different species. Through the analysis of canopy spectral responses, differences were noted n the visible range. An Acacia Koa discriminating index was developed based on the continuum removal procedure that consistently identified the locations of A. koa. Additionally, NIR reflectance was found to be exceptionally high n Cryptomeria japonica and Sequoia sempervirens. The NIR responses saturated he sensor and the degree of saturation was scale and wavelength dependent.

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)0.000
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 score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.181
Teacher spread0.167 · 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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRemote Sensing in Agriculture→French-language works237,207→