MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2031860171 · doi:10.1080/01431160410001716923

Mapping insect‐induced tree defoliation and mortality using coarse spatial resolution satellite imagery

2005· article· en· W2031860171 on OpenAlexaffabout
Robert Fraser, R. Latifovic

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Remote Sensing · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVegetation (pathology)Satellite imageryEnvironmental scienceRemote sensingSpatial ecologySatelliteAerial imageryPhysical geographyNormalized Difference Vegetation IndexGeographyEcologyBiologyClimate change

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Insect‐induced defoliation causes significant timber and carbon losses in many forested countries. The purpose of this investigation was to examine the potential use of coarse spatial resolution satellite imagery for mapping tree defoliation and mortality caused by a large insect infestation. We examined 1 km multi‐temporal SPOT Vegetation (VGT) data over a coniferous forest region in Quebec, Canada that was severely defoliated during 1998–2000 by the eastern hemlock looper. A logistic regression model based on satellite change metrics was developed to map defoliation and mortality. The results suggest that coarse imagery is effective for mapping large‐scale conifer forest mortality caused by insects, and could also be useful for near real‐time monitoring of severe defoliation, although with 2–3 times greater errors of commission.

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)0.001
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 score0.326
Threshold uncertainty score0.648

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Citations93
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Remote SensingSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207