MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104291549 · doi:10.5589/m10-029

Assessing the utility of lidar remote sensing technology to identify mule deer winter habitat

2010· article· en· W2104291549 on OpenAlexfundvenueaboutno aff
Nicholas C. Coops, Jason Duffe, Cathy Koot

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Remote Sensing · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Space Agency
KeywordsLidarOdocoileusHabitatGeographySnowRange (aeronautics)Environmental scienceUnderstoryCanopyAerial photographyElevation (ballistics)Physical geographyRemote sensingForestryEcologyMeteorologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AbstractWinter habitat for mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) is a critical concern throughout interior British Columbia, Canada. In winter, mule deer require a food source of twigs and woody browse and face significant winter snow cover. A range of studies have established that good winter range for mule deer reduces the impact of a negative energy balance by providing adequate food, good vegetative cover, and shallow snow. Generally, sites with old Douglas-fir and moderate to high canopy cover on warmer aspects and moderately steep slopes are preferred, resulting in a suite of structural stand conditions, which can be used to map mule deer winter range habitat within the interior Douglas-fir range. The increased availability of light detection and ranging (lidar) data to management agencies and the recent adoption of lidar technology by forestry agencies allow us to assess the capacity of this technology to map some variables important to winter mule deer habitat suitability, using criteria similar to those defined using conventional aerial photography. Results indicate that lidar-derived solar radiation regime, elevation, and overstorey cover are all useful attributes in decision-tree models relating lidar to conventionally derived descriptors of mule deer winter habitat. These lidar-derived models describe up to 75% of the variance in overall stand structure and confirm that this technology is a viable tool which can be used to assess habitat throughout this region.L'habitat d'hiver du cerf mulet (Odocoileus hemionus) est une préoccupation cruciale partout à l'intérieur de la Colombie-britannique, au Canada. Durant l'hiver, les cerfs mulets ont besoin d'une source de nourriture composée de ramilles et de brout et ces derniers doivent composer avec un couvert neigeux important. Diverses études ont établi qu'une bonne aire d'hivernage pour les cerfs mulets réduit l'impact du bilan d'énergie négatif en apportant une nourriture adéquate, un bon couvert de végétation et un couvert neigeux peu profond. Généralement, les sites peuplés de vieux pins Douglas, avec un couvert de modéré à dense, sur les versants plus chauds et à pente modérément élevée sont préférés résultant ainsi en une série de conditions structurales de peuplement qui peuvent être utilisées pour cartographier l'habitat d'hiver du cerf mulet dans la zone d'extension du pin Douglas. La disponibilité accrue des données lidar (« light detection and ranging ») auprès des agences d'aménagement ainsi que leur adoption récente par les agences forestières nous permettent d'évaluer le potentiel de cette technologie pour la cartographie de certaines variables importantes dans le contexte de l'évaluation du potentiel d'un site comme aire d'hivernage du cerf mulet en ayant recours à des critères semblables à ceux définis à partir de la photographie aérienne conventionnelle. Les résultats montrent que le régime de rayonnement solaire, l'élévation et la nature du couvert de l'étage supérieur dérivés des données lidar sont tous des attributs utiles dans les modèles basés sur un arbre de décision reliant les données lidar aux descripteurs conventionnels de l'habitat d'hiver du cerf mulet. Ces modèles dérivés des données lidar décrivent jusqu'à 75 % de la variance dans la structure générale de peuplement et confirment que cette technologie constitue un outil viable pouvant être utilisé pour l'évaluation des habitats sur l'ensemble de cette région.[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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.856
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 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

Citations31
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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