MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A multisensor, multitemporal approach for monitoring herbaceous vegetation growth in the Amazon floodplain

2013· article· en· W2118518079 on OpenAlexaff
Thiago Sanna Freire Silva, Maycira Costa, Evlyn Márcia Leão de Moraes Novo, John M. Mélack

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing in Agriculture
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFloodplainHerbaceous plantVegetation (pathology)Environmental scienceAmazon rainforestRemote sensingHydrology (agriculture)GeographyCartographyGeologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Amazon River floodplain is an important source of atmospheric CO2and CH4. Aquatic herbaceous vegetation (macrophytes) have been shown to contribute significantly to floodplain net primary productivity (NPP) and methane emission in the region. Their fast growth rates under both flooded and dry conditions make herbaceous vegetation the most variable element in the Amazon floodplain NPP budget, and the most susceptible to environmental changes. The present study combines multitemporal Radarsat-1 and MODIS images to monitor spatial and temporal changes in herbaceous vegetation cover in the Amazon floodplain. Radarsat-1 images were acquired from Dec/2003 to Oct/2005, and MODIS daily surface reflectance products were acquired for the two cloud-free dates closest to each Radarsat-1 acquisition. An object-based, hierarchical algorithm was developed using the temporal SAR information to discriminate Permanent Open Water (OW), Floodplain (FP) and Upland (UL) classes at Level 1, and then subdivide the FP class into Woody Vegetation (WV) and Possible Macrophytes (PM) at Level 2. At Level 3, optical and SAR information were combined to discriminate actual herbaceous cover at each date. The resulting maps had accuracies ranging from 80% to 90% for Level 1 and 2 classifications, and from 60% to 70% for Level 3 classifications, with kappa values ranging between 0.7 and 0.9 for Levels 1 and 2 and between 0.5 and 0.6 for Level 3. All study sites had noticeable variations in the extent of herbaceous cover throughout the hydrological year, with maximum areas up to four times larger than minimum areas. The proposed classification method was able to capture the spatial pattern of macrophyte growth and development in the studied area, and the multitemporal information was essential for both separating vegetation cover types and assessing monthly variation in herbaceous cover extent.

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)0.000
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations4
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRemote Sensing in AgricultureFrench-language works237,207