MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2042964293 · doi:10.5589/m05-005

Sensitivity of the Landsat enhanced wetness difference index (EWDI) to temporal resolution

2005· article· en· W2042964293 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Steven E. Franklin, Chris B Jagielko, M. B. Lavigne

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Remote Sensing · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing in Agriculture
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDisturbance (geology)Environmental scienceSatelliteIndex (typography)GeographySensitivity (control systems)Satellite imageryVegetation (pathology)ForestryRemote sensingPhysical geographyGeologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AbstractWe investigated the sensitivity of the Landsat enhanced wetness difference index (EWDI) to temporal resolution in detecting forest harvesting and silvicultural activities in the Fundy Model Forest in southern New Brunswick. The severity of disturbance was underestimated in the multiyear EWDI because of regrowth and natural variability. In certain instances the severity of disturbance was overestimated with an annual EWDI; for example, a herbicide application in a young stand could have an annual wetness difference approximately equal to that of a forest clearcut. In general, we found annual EWDI differences to be more accurate than multiyear differences in detecting change. The sensitivity of satellite image change detection techniques to temporal resolution must be considered when national or international protocols are developed to provide input to forest monitoring or carbon accounting efforts.Nous avons étudié la sensibilité de l'indice EWDI (« enhanced wetness difference index ») de Landsat à la résolution temporelle dans la détection des activités de coupe forestière et sylvicoles dans la forêt modèle de Fundy, dans le sud du Nouveau-Brunswick. Le niveau de perturbation a été sous-estimé dans les données EWDI multi-années en raison de la repousse et de la variabilité naturelle. Dans certains cas, le niveau de perturbation était surestimé par la valeur annuelle de EWDI; par exemple, une application d'herbicide dans un jeune peuplement pouvait montrer une différence annuelle d'humidité sensiblement égale à celle d'une coupe à blanc. En général, nous avons trouvé que les différences annuelles de EWDI étaient plus précises que les différences multi-années pour la détection du changement. La sensibilité des techniques de détection du changement par satellite à la résolution temporelle doit être prise en considération lorsque l'on développe des protocoles nationaux ou internationaux afin de fournir des intrants aux activités de suivi de la forêt ou de comptabilité du carbone.[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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.802
Threshold uncertainty score0.980

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 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

Citations9
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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