Spectral unmixing of multiple lichen species and underlying substrate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cryptogamic covers are a wide range of photoautotrophic plants which synthesize their own food while using sunlight as an energy source. Globally, cryptogrammic covers (such as cyanobacteria, algae, fungi, lichens, and bryophytes) annually uptake about 7% of the net primary production of terrestrial vegetation and account for about half of annual biological terrestrial nitrogen fixation. On the basis of these contributions to global carbon and nitrogen cycling, it is crucial to be able to accurately monitor seasonal and regional patterns of cryptogamic cover distribution and abundance. However, lichen-encrusted rock seldom comprises 100% of the ground cover within a pixel of remote-sensed imagery, and thereby arise challenges in lichen mapping and monitoring. Here we explore spectroscopic methods and spectral mixture analysis (SMA) to overcome the challenges of reflectance spectroscopy-based optical remote sensing detection and characterization of crustose lichen species. One suite of discrete wavelengths (λ1 = {400, 470, 520, 570, 680, 800, 1080, 1120, 1200, 1300, 1470, 1670, 1750, 2132, 2198, 2232 nm}) and two wavelength regions (λ2 = {λ: 800 nm ≤ λ ≤ 1300 nm} and λ3 = {λ: 2000 nm ≤ λ ≤ 2400 nm}) were investigated for their ability to discriminate between substrate and different lichen species. We found that the spectral region 800–1300 nm performed best at lichen-substrate differentiation and interspecial lichen differentiation. Furthermore, measures of central tendency from multiple wavelength regions are superior to most individual wavelength regions, particularly for lichen-rock unmixing.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".