Using the global positioning system to map disturbance patterns of forest harvesting machinery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A method was presented to transform sampled machine positional data obtained from a global positioning system (GPS) receiver into a two-dimensional raster map of number of passes as a function of location. The effect of three sources of error in the transformation process were investigated: path sampling rate (receiver sampling frequency); output raster resolution; and GPS receiver errors. Total accuracy of traffic maps across a site (the summed areas receiving one, two, three, etc. passes) was not greatly affected by the error sources. The estimate of number of passes at a specific point, however, was heavily dependent on the presence of errors in the input data. Adding random offsets to each GPS position, for example, resulted in less than a 35% chance that an individual pixel would be classified correctly following transformation when compared with a reference raster. Although the absolute accuracy of the GPStransformation system was not defined, it was concluded that data derived from applying it could be used to make estimates of total site disturbance and to identify regions of higher or lower disturbance but was less effective when applied in defining number of passes at a given point in a stand.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".