Defining Transition Rules with Reinforcement Learning for Modeling Land Cover Change
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spatio-temporal modeling provides the opportunity to simulate geographic processes of land use and land cover change (LUCC) by integrating geographic information systems (GIS) with various machine learning approaches to computing. Contemporary models are often developed using a training dataset to define a set of probabilistic transition rules that govern how a landscape changes over time. However, the use of training datasets can be problematic for spatio-temporal modeling, as they can limit the ability to incorporate system complexity and hinder the transferability of the model to different datasets. The purpose of this study is to evaluate a machine learning approach called reinforcement learning (RL) for defining transition rules for GIS-based models of land cover change due to natural resource extraction. Specifically, RL is evaluated based on its potential for constructing models independent of training datasets that can handle different levels of complexity and be transferred across different spatial extents. An RL model for Land Cover Change (RL-LCC) is developed for considering economic and ecological goals involved in natural resource management, and implemented using a hypothetical forest management scenario. Simulation results reveal that agents in the RL-LCC model are able to develop transition rules from their experience in their landscape in a variety of simulation scenarios that allow them to achieve their goals. This study demonstrates the benefits of integrating RL and GIS in order to address important issues of space, time and complexity.
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.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it