Trend analysis of time-series phenology derived from satellite data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Remote sensing information has been used in studies of the seasonal dynamics (phenology) of the land surface for the past 15 years. While our understanding of remote sensing phenology is still in development, it is regarded as a key to understanding land surface processes over large areas. Repeat observations from satellite-borne multispectral sensors provide a mechanism to move from plant-specific to regional scale studies of phenology. In addition, we now have sufficient time-series (since 1982 at 8-km resolution covering the globe and since 1989 at 1-km resolution over the conterminous US) to study seasonal and interannual trends from satellite data. Phenology metrics including start of season, end of season, duration of season, and seasonally integrated greenness were derived from 8 km AVHRR data over North America spanning the years 1982-2003. Trend analysis was performed on the annual summaries of the metrics to determine areas with increasing or decreasing trends for the time period under study. Results show only small areas of changing start of season, but the end of season is coming later over well defined areas of New England and SE Canada, principally as a result of land use changes. The total greenness metric is most striking at the shrub/tundra boundary of North America, indicating increasing vegetation vigor or possible vegetation conversion as a result of warming.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".