MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2108975256 · doi:10.5558/tfc80359-3

Ecosystem mapping in the Lower Foothills Subregion of Alberta: Application of fuzzy logic

2004· article· en· W2108975256 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
L Nadeau, C. Li, Hummel Hans

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Forestry Chronicle · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Land Suitability Analysis
Canadian institutionsCanadian Forest ServiceNorthern Alberta Institute of Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFoothillsGeographic information systemPolygon (computer graphics)CartographyFuzzy logicIdentification (biology)Field (mathematics)Elevation (ballistics)Range (aeronautics)Computer scienceVegetation (pathology)GeographyRemote sensingDatabaseEcologyMathematicsArtificial intelligenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Predictive ecosite mapping involves developing computer models that consistently identify and map ecosystems. This method of predicting ecosystem occurrence on the landscape uses basic inventory information and expert knowledge, and is an effective integrated planning tool for providing a record of the location and spatial distribution of ecosystems within a management area. Fuzzy logic technology can be used to computerize essential elements of ecosystem identification, and the outputs can be linked to a Geographic Information System for map production. A pilot study was undertaken on the application of this technology to the Alberta Ecological Land Classification database and the resulting ecosite map for a township located in central Alberta (Tp42R9W5). The range of attributes used in the program was constrained by the attributes recorded on mapped polygons. Three maps with suitable attributes were available for the township studied: a Digitized Elevation Model map, an Alberta Vegetation Inventory map, and a reconnaissance soil survey map. Attributes of all polygons from all three maps were compiled and seven attributes (humus form, Ah thickness, surface texture, aspect, organic thickness, slope angle, and Alberta Vegetation Inventory moisture regime) were chosen to produce a computerized program for ecosite identification. Four sets of data were used to calibrate the program, as well as a small-plot data set collected from the township studied. The computer program was used to analyze the polygon data corresponding to two sets of data collected in the field and resulted in 72% and 70% similarity between the choices of experts and of the computer program. The quality of the original polygon attributes contributed to errors in identification. In addition, the reconnaissance soil survey map gave only an estimate of four attributes (Ah horizon thickness, organic thickness, humus form, and surface texture). Key words: ecosystem classification, site classification, fuzzy logic, fuzzy sets, predictive ecosystem mapping, predictive site mapping

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.163
Threshold uncertainty score0.328

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations9
Published2004
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Forestry ChronicleSame topicSoil and Land Suitability AnalysisFrench-language works237,207