Tracking Desertification in California Using Remote Sensing: A Sand Dune Encroachment Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most remote sensing studies in deserts focus solely on vegetation monitoring to assess the extent of desertification. However, the application of sand dune encroachment into such studies would greatly improve the accuracy in the prediction criteria of risk-prone areas. This study applies the latter methodology for tracking desertification using sand dunes in the Kelso Dunes (in Newberry-Baker, CA, USA). The approach involves the comparison of spectral characteristics of the dunes in Landsat Thematic Mapper (TM) images over a 24-year period (1982, 1988, 1994, 2000, and 2006). During this 24-year period, two El Niño events occurred (1983 and 1993); it was concluded that despite the shift in predominant winds, the short-term variation in wind direction did not make a noticeable change in dune formation, but greatly influences vegetation cover. Therefore, relying solely on vegetation monitoring to assess desertification can lead to overestimations in prediction analysis. Results from this study indicate that the Kelso Dunes are experiencing an encroachment rate of approximately 5.9 m3/m/yr over the 24-year period. While quantifying the Kelso Dunes or any natural dynamic system is subject to uncertainties, the encroachment rate approach reflects the highly heterogeneous nature of the sand dunes (in regards to spectral variability in brightness) at Kelso Dunes and serves as an exemplar for future research.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".