MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2098464702 · doi:10.5589/m07-058

Mapping piping plover (<i>Charadrius melodus melodus</i>) habitat in coastal areas using airborne lidar data

2007· article· en· W2098464702 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
R. Goodale, C. Hopkinson, David Colville, Diane L. Amirault‐Langlais

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Remote Sensing · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
KeywordsLidarCharadriusHabitatSalt marshPloverElevation (ballistics)Barrier islandEnvironmental scienceShoreGeographyRemote sensingIntertidal zoneWetlandEstuaryHydrology (agriculture)GeologyEcologyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AbstractCoastal estuaries and beach habitat are some of the most important and productive ecosystems in Atlantic Canada. These sensitive areas are crucial for hundreds of land and marine species. Mapping and monitoring coastal habitat is important for the protection of species such as the endangered piping plover (Charadrius melodus melodus). Light detection and ranging (lidar) elevation and intensity data have been used together to successfully classify land-cover types. This study explores the use of elevation, texture, slope, and intensity to classify coastal habitat. Lidar data were collected over a barrier beach and estuary on the South Shore of Nova Scotia. Ground validation and training sites were collected using a real-time kinematic global positioning system. Unsupervised, supervised, and logical filter classifications were compared for separability of various beach and intertidal habitats. Coastal land classes similar in elevation, texture, and slope, such as mudflats, sand beaches, and salt marshes, relied heavily on intensity data for separation. Tidal saturation of these areas produced similar intensity returns, resulting in poor separation between classes. Logical filters applied to the lidar data improved the classification of coastal habitat compared to standard unsupervised and supervised classifications. Additional logical filters were used to isolate important nesting and feeding habitat for piping plover. Results of this study suggest that lidar can effectively be used for classifying coastal habitat if tidal and seasonal factors are taken into consideration.Les estuaires côtiers et les habitats de plage sont parmi les écosystèmes les plus importants et productifs dans la région atlantique au Canada. Ces zones sensibles sont cruciales pour des centaines d'espèces terrestres et marines. La cartographie et le suivi des habitats côtiers sont essentiels pour la protection des espèces comme le pluvier siffleur (Charadrius melodus melodus), une espèce menacée. Des données d'altitude et d'intensité lidar (« light detection and ranging ») ont été utilisées conjointement avec succès pour la classification des types de couvert. La présente étude explore l'utilisation de l'altitude, de la texture, de la pente et de l'intensité pour la classification des habitats côtiers. Les données lidar ont été acquises au-dessus d'un cordon littoral et d'un estuaire sur la côte sud de la Nouvelle-Écosse. Les sites de validation et d'entraînement au sol ont été collectés en utilisant un système de positionnement global cinématique en temps réel. Les résultats des classifications non dirigée, dirigée et par filtre logique ont été comparés dans le contexte de la séparabilité des divers habitats de plage ou intertidaux. La séparation des classes semblables de couvert côtier en termes d'altitude, de texture et de pente telles que les vasières, les plages sablonneuses et les marais salants reposait fortement sur les données d'intensité. La saturation par la marée de ces zones a produit des retours d'intensité semblables résultant en une faible séparation entre les classes. L'application de filtres logiques aux données lidar a permis d'améliorer la classification des habitats côtiers comparativement aux classifications standards non dirigée et dirigée. Des filtres logiques additionnels ont été utilisés pour isoler les habitats importants de nidification et d'alimentation pour le pluvier siffleur. Les résultats de cette étude suggèrent que les données lidar peuvent être utilisées efficacement pour la classification des habitats côtiers si les facteurs tidaux et saisonniers sont pris en considération.[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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.930
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.219 · 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.

Study designOther design
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

Citations25
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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