Large-area mountain pine beetle infestations: Spatial data representation and accuracy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Point data generated from helicopter surveys are used to determine the location and magnitude of mountain pine beetle infestations. Although collected for tactical planning, these data also provide a rich source of information for scientific investigations. To facilitate spatial research, it is important to consider how to best represent spatially explicit mountain pine beetle infestation data. This paper focuses on the spatial representation of point-based aerial helicopter surveys, which can be difficult to represent due to issues associated with large data quantities and data uncertainty. In this paper, the benefit of using a kernel density estimator to convert point data to a continuous raster surface is demonstrated. Field data are used to assess the accuracy of the point-based aerial helicopter survey data and the kernel density estimator is extended to incorporate data uncertainty. While the accuracy of point-based aerial surveys is high, with 92.6% of points differing by no more than ± 10 trees, there is a general tendency to overestimate infestation magnitude. The method developed for incorporating uncertainty into the kernel density estimator reduces overestimation and improves the correspondence between estimated infestation intensities and field data values. Key words: mountain pine beetle, data representation, visualization, kernel density estimators, uncertainty
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".