Effects of vegetation heterogeneity and surface topography on spatial scaling of net primary productivity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Due to the heterogeneous nature of the land surface, spatial scaling is an inevitable issue in the development of land models coupled with low-resolution Earth system models (ESMs) for predicting land-atmosphere interactions and carbon-climate feedbacks. In this study, a simple spatial scaling algorithm is developed to correct errors in net primary productivity (NPP) estimates made at a coarse spatial resolution based on sub-pixel information of vegetation heterogeneity and surface topography. An eco-hydrological model BEPS-TerrainLab, which considers both vegetation and topographical effects on the vertical and lateral water flows and the carbon cycle, is used to simulate NPP at 30 m and 1 km resolutions for a 5700 km2 watershed with an elevation range from 518 m to 3767 m in the Qinling Mountain, Shanxi Province, China. Assuming that the NPP simulated at 30 m resolution represents the reality and that at 1 km resolution is subject to errors due to sub-pixel heterogeneity, a spatial scaling index (SSI) is developed to correct the coarse resolution NPP values pixel by pixel. The agreement between the NPP values at these two resolutions is improved considerably from R2 = 0.782 to R2 = 0.884 after the correction. The mean bias error (MBE) in NPP modelled at the 1 km resolution is reduced from 14.8 g C m−2 yr−1 to 4.8 g C m−2 yr−1 in comparison with NPP modelled at 30 m resolution, where the mean NPP is 668 g C m−2 yr−1. The range of spatial variations of NPP at 30 m resolution is larger than that at 1 km resolution. Land cover fraction is the most important vegetation factor to be considered in NPP spatial scaling, and slope is the most important topographical factor for NPP spatial scaling especially in mountainous areas, because of its influence on the lateral water redistribution, affecting water table, soil moisture and plant growth. Other factors including leaf area index (LAI) and elevation have small and additive effects on improving the spatial scaling between these two resolutions.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".