MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2127100701 · doi:10.1109/igarss.2002.1025782

Use of remote sensing data to examine spatial pattern measurement for improved forest management practices

2003· article· en· W2127100701 on OpenAlexaffabout
H.G. Wilson, Philip J. Howarth

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLand Use and Ecosystem Services
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDisturbance (geology)WoodlandTaigaGeographyForest managementSustainable forest managementEnvironmental resource managementWoodland caribouRemote sensingLoggingEnvironmental scienceEcologyForestryHabitatGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traditional practices of woodland harvesting have left rectangular-shaped voids in forested landscapes. However, recent research devoted to conserving biological diversity in disturbed forests has suggested that the generation of forest clearcuts should attempt to resemble those created naturally by fire with respect to size, distribution, and composition of species. In this paper, textural and statistical techniques for examination of forest landscape patterns, associated with anthropogenic disturbance processes, are explored using Landsat TM imagery of a boreal forest region in central Ontario, Canada. This region is known to have undergone clearcut disturbances. It is suggested that knowledge of the links between disturbance process and resulting pattern will aid in directing forest management practitioners towards creating an ecologically sustainable environment.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.100
Threshold uncertainty score0.199

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
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 head0.138
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.140 · 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

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLand Use and Ecosystem Services→French-language works237,207→