MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2013651383 · doi:10.5589/m06-018

Studying mixed grassland ecosystems II: optimum pixel size

2006· article· en· W2013651383 on OpenAlexfundvenueno aff
Yuhong He, Xulin Guo, John Wilmshurst, Bingcheng Si

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Remote Sensing · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing in Agriculture
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaParks Canada
KeywordsTransectGrasslandVariogramLeaf area indexScale (ratio)Vegetation (pathology)Remote sensingSpatial variabilityWaveletEnvironmental scienceHyperspectral imagingSpatial ecologySampling (signal processing)Grassland ecosystemSpatial analysisGeographyStatisticsMathematicsCartographyEcologyKrigingComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AbstractIt was determined in a companion paper that the litter-corrected adjusted transformed soil-adjusted vegetation index (L-ATSAVI) was the best leaf area index (LAI) indicator in a mixed grassland ecosystem. To optimize the sampling procedures and address the scaling issues for the mixed grass ecosystem, this study examined the dominant scale of spatial variation in both LAI and L-ATSAVI using two methods, namely Mexican hat wavelet analysis and semivariogram analysis. The results showed that both methods can identify grassland spatial variation, and the cyclicity (the nature repetition in a dataset) of grassland LAI was about 140 m along the central transect of five parallel transects within the study area. The advantage of wavelet analysis over semivariogram analysis for spatial pattern interpretation was that it could identify the exact location of the transition. The wavelet analysis demonstrated that the cyclicity of L-ATSAVI also corresponded well with features of grassland LAI along the transect. Therefore, following the sampling theorems, a pixel size of less than 35 m will retain most of the spatial variation of grassland LAI in our study area. In terms of this optimum pixel size, the scale of ground-based hyperspectral data and LAI along the transect was simulated using a low-pass filtering procedure with a 30 m moving window. Statistical analysis indicated that scale-simulated L-ATSAVI could significantly explain more grassland LAI (r2 up to 89%) than the original 3 m resolution. This conclusion can be further applied to select the optimal pixel size of remote sensing images and detect the hierarchical characteristics in a grassland landscape.Dans l'article connexe à celui-ci, nous avons déterminé que le L-ATSAVI (« litter-corrected adjusted transformed soil-adjusted vegetation index ») était le meilleur indicateur de l'indice de surface foliaire (LAI) pour un écosystème de prairie mixte. Afin d'optimiser les procédures d'échantillonnage et de répondre aux problématiques d'échelle pour l'écosystème de prairie mixte, la présente étude a examiné l'échelle dominante de la variation spatiale du LAI et du L-ATSAVI en utilisant deux méthodes : les ondelettes de type chapeau mexicain et l'analyse par semivariogramme. Les résultats ont montré que les deux méthodes permettent d'identifier les variations spatiales des prairies et que le cycle du LAI de prairie était d'environ 140 m le long du transect. L'avantage de l'analyse en ondelettes par rapport au semivariogramme pour l'interprétation des patrons spatiaux résidait dans le fait qu'elle permettait d'identifier la position exacte de la transition. L'analyse en ondelettes a démontré que le cycle du L-ATSAVI correspondait bien également aux caractéristiques du LAI de prairie le long du transect. Ainsi, suivant les théorèmes d'échantillonnage, une taille de pixel inférieure à 35 m conservera la majorité de la variation spatiale du LAI de prairie dans notre région d'étude. En terme de dimension optimale du pixel, l'échelle des données hyperspectrales acquises au sol et du LAI le long du transect a été simulée à l'aide d'une procédure de filtrage passe-bas avec une fenêtre mobile de 30 m. L'analyse statistique a montré que le L-ATSAVI simulé à l'échelle pouvait expliquer de façon significative une plus grande partie du LAI (r2 jusqu'à 89 %) de prairie que la résolution originale de 3 m. Cette conclusion peut s'appliquer également à la sélection de la taille optimale des pixels des images de télédétection et pour détecter les caractéristiques hiérarchiques du paysage de prairie.[Traduit par la Rédaction]

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.563
Threshold uncertainty score0.954

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations32
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Remote SensingSame topicRemote Sensing in AgricultureFrench-language works237,207