MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2169570749 · doi:10.1109/igarss.1994.399049

Characterization of canopy physiology at BOREAS with SAR

2002· article· en· W2169570749 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
K. C. McDonald, R. Zimmermann, J. Way, Eric Rignot

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEcotoneBlack spruceTaigaBorealEnvironmental scienceVegetation (pathology)BiomeCanopyBoreal ecosystemRemote sensingHydrology (agriculture)Atmospheric sciencesForestryGeologyEcologyGeographyShrubEcosystem

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Boreal Ecosystem-Atmosphere Study (BOREAS) is a multidisciplinary field and remote sensing study the goal of which is to obtain an improved understanding of the interactions between the boreal forest biome and the atmosphere in order to clarify their roles in global change. The two principal BOREAS field sites, both located within Canada, are located in the southern boreal ecotone, encompassing Prince Albert National Park, Saskatchewan, and in the northern boreal ecotone near Thompson, Manitoba. This paper presents research carried out as part of BOREAS to characterize forest ecophysiological processes as observed by the JPL AIRSAR, SIR-C/X-SAR and the ERS-1 SAR. The authors have installed automated measurement systems in four different forest stands within the BOREAS field sites. The three stands instrumented in the southern region are dominated by trembling aspen (Populus tremuloides), black spruce (Picea mariana), and jack pine (Pinus banksiana), respectively, while the one stand in the northern region is dominated by black spruce. These stands have each been instrumented with sensors that provide continuous in situ monitoring of tree xylem water flux and vegetation tissue and soil temperatures. Since their installation in the autumn of 1993 and winter of 1994, these sensors have provided a continuous record of vegetation hydrologic activity. In addition, since April 1994, three of these stands have been instrumented for continuous monitoring of dielectric constant within the hydroactive tissue of a single tree trunk. During the 1994 Spring Thaw Focused Field Campaign, the authors obtained additional in situ measurements including detailed dielectric profiles of the trunks from selected trees at each site, as well as diurnal water potential observations and porometry. Synthetic aperture radars (SARs) have been imaging these sites while in situ data collection has been underway. Imagery has been obtained by sensors including SIR-C/X-SAR, AIRSAR and ERS-1 SARs. The ground-based in situ observations are examined to establish the physiologic state of the forest canopies. SAR imagery is examined to determine the response of the radar backscatter to the observed canopy physiology.>

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.175 · 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

Citations1
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications→French-language works237,207→