MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004381637 · doi:10.3808/jei.200900147

Land Cover Change Detection Using MSS and MODIS Data: A Case Study for Liangshan-Xiangling Region in Southwestern China

2009· article· en· W2004381637 on OpenAlexaff
Xingyang Song

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Informatics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicRemote Sensing and Land Use
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLand coverChinaNormalized Difference Vegetation IndexChange detectionGeographyPhysical geographyCover (algebra)Climate changeVegetation coverLand useVegetation (pathology)Environmental scienceRemote sensingEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As a result of rapid socioeconomic development and climate change, the land cover has been changing in the mountainous areas in southwestern China while the associated ecological environment has been seriously disturbed. This study is to quantify the land cover change in Liangshan-Xiangling Region in Sichuan Province in China from the 1970s to present and to compare the land cover change rates among different land cover types. Two groups of remote sensing data, including MSS data in 1974-1980 and MODIS data in 2002-2007, were utilized to investigate the land cover changes during different time periods in the study area. The NDVI differencing and unsupervised classification compassion methods were used to detect the land cover quality and quantity changes. The results showed that the vegetation cover in the study area decreased significantly in the 1970s, but increased in recent years due to the establishment of nature reserves and enhancement of environment protection.

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 score0.158
Threshold uncertainty score0.314

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Citations4
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental InformaticsSame topicRemote Sensing and Land UseFrench-language works237,207