Attributing changes in land cover using independent disturbance datasets: a case study of the Yucatan Peninsula, Mexico
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Detailed observations of natural and anthropogenic disturbance events that impact forest structure and the distribution of carbon are essential to estimate changes in terrestrial carbon pools and the associated emissions and removals of greenhouse gasses. Recent advances in remote sensing approaches have resulted in annual and decadal estimates of land-cover change derived from observations using broad-scale moderate resolution imaging spectroradiometer (MODIS) 250 m–1 km imagery. These land-use change estimates, however, are often not attributed directly to a cause or activity and are not well validated, especially in tropical areas. Knowledge of the type of disturbance that caused the observed land-cover changes is important, however, for the quantification of the associated impacts on ecosystem carbon stocks and fluxes. In this paper, we provide estimates of the amount of forest land-cover change in a Mexican forested region and propose an approach for attributing the cause of the observed changes to the underlying disturbance driver. To do so, we collate geospatial and remote sensing data from a variety of sources to summarize statistics about the major disturbances within the Yucatan Peninsula, an “early action” region for the reduction of emissions from deforestation and degradation, from 2005 to 2010. We combine the datasets to develop rules to estimate the likely disturbances that caused the observed land-cover changes based on their spatially explicit location. Finally, we compare our observed disturbance rates to those detected using classified land-cover data derived from MODIS.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 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".