A method for trend-based change analysis in Arctic tundra using the 25-year Landsat archive
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Remote sensing has provided evidence of vegetation changes in Arctic tundra that may be attributable to recent climate warming. These changes are evident from local scales as expanding shrub cover observed in aerial photos, to continental scales as greening trends based on satellite vegetation indices. One challenge in applying conventional two date, satellite change detection in tundra environments is the short growing season observation window, combined with high inter-annual variability in vegetation conditions. We present an alternative approach for investigating tundra vegetation and surface cover changes based on trend analysis of long-term (1985-present) Landsat TM/ETM+ image stacks. The Tasseled Cap brightness, greenness, and wetness indices, representing linear transformations of the optical channels, are analysed for per-pixel trends using robust linear regression. The index trends are then related to changes in fractional shrub and other vegetation covers using a regression tree classifier trained with high resolution land cover. Fractional trends can be summarised by vegetation or ecosystem type to reveal any consistent patterns. Example results are shown for a 3 000 km 2 study area in northern Yukon, Canada where index and fractional changes are related to growth of vascular plants and coastal erosion.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 it