MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2057108631 · doi:10.5558/tfc82177-2

Detection of post-fire residuals using high- and medium-resolution satellite imagery

2006· article· en· W2057108631 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Mark Kachmar, Arturo Sánchez‐Azofeifa

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Forestry Chronicle · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsAlberta EnergyUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResidualThematic MapperRemote sensingLand coverSatellite imageryThematic mapEnvironmental scienceSatelliteTaigaPhysical geographyLand useGeographyCartographyForestryComputer scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Forest fires can burn across large forested areas over short time periods, but they rarely consume all the trees in their path. Fires leave live irregularly shaped patches or rows of mature trees known as "residuals" within the fire perimeter. IKONOS and Landsat Enhanced Thematic Mapper Plus satellite imagery were acquired over two forested areas affected by fire in the northern boreal forest of Alberta. Each image was classified and residuals were detected with greater than 88% accuracy. Residual patches were grouped into nine minimum mapping unit (MMU) classes and area, patch, and shape level metrics were calculated for each group. Analysis of metric results highlighted how the choice of satellite imagery used to characterize and quantify residuals, the size of the MMU used to define the residuals, and human induced land use cover change (LUCC) processes occurring within fire perimeters were interrelated factors that impacted estimates of residual numbers and sizes. Residual metrics calculated in one fire perimeter should therefore be carefully assessed according to local land use and land cover change dynamics before suggesting that residual information captured in any fire perimeter can typify residual patterns elsewhere. Key words: remote sensing, high resolution, medium resolution, satellite imagery, forest fires, wildfire, residual forest islands, geographic information systems (GIS), minimum mapping unit

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.725
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations13
Published2006
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Forestry ChronicleSame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207