Quantification of landscape change from satellite remote sensing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Satellite remote sensing data and methods can be used to develop maps of large areas at different times in order to assess changes in forest ecosystem patterns and processes. Such maps are useful in understanding wildlife populations and habitat, forest biodiversity, and forest productivity. They may be important in ecological monitoring programs at multiple spatial and temporal scales, and could include assessment of structural aspects of the landscape, such as forest or habitat fragmentation. Quantification and measurement of landscape structure depend on the definition of landscape classes or patches, defined on the basis of more or less homogeneous elements, which differ in some measurable way from neighbouring patches. In this paper, we review some of the issues, and provide examples using satellite remote sensing data, in the quantification of landscape structure in two Canadian forests. The link between landscape structure and biodiversity is provided through the emergence of ecological understanding of species richness, species-habitat or niches, and metapopulation dynamics. Key words: forest disturbance, landscape metrics, satellite remote sensing, forest fragmentation, monitoring, biodiversity, change detection
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".