MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2172113778 · doi:10.1080/01431160110113917

A multivariate approach to vegetation mapping of Manitoba's Hudson Bay Lowlands

2002· article· en· W2172113778 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Remote Sensing · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRangeland and Wildlife Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersChurchill Northern Studies CentreNational Park ServiceNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFisheries and Oceans CanadaCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível SuperiorParks Canada
KeywordsVegetation (pathology)Vegetation classificationBayRemote sensingGeographyPhysical geographyPrincipal component analysisMultivariate statisticsCartographyEnvironmental scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Hudson Bay Lowlands of Manitoba contain a wide range of vegetation types that reflect local variations in climate, geological history, permafrost, fire, wildlife grazing and human use. This study, in Wapusk National Park and the Cape Churchill Wildlife Management Area, uses a Landsat-5 TM image mosaic to examine landscape-level vegetation classes. Field data from 600 sites were first classified into 14 vegetation classes and three unvegetated classes. Principal component analysis was used to examine the spectral properties of these classes and identify outliers. Multiple discriminant analysis was then applied to determine the statistical significance of the vegetation classes in spectral space. Finally, redundancy analysis was used to determine the amount of vegetation variance explained by the spectral reflectance data. We advocate this adaptive learning approach to vegetation mapping, by which the researcher employs an iterative strategy to carefully examine the relationship between ground and spectral data. This approach is labour intensive, but has the advantage of producing vegetation classes that are spectrally separable, decreasing the likelihood of errors in classification caused by overlap between classes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.942
Threshold uncertainty score0.271

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.210 · 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