Boots on the Ground at Yaxnohcah
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This study proposes a sampling method for ground-truthing LiDAR-derived data that will allow researchers to verify or predict the accuracy of results over a large area. Our case study is focused on a 24 km2area centered on the site of Yaxnohcah in the Yucatan Peninsula. This area is characterized by a variety of dense tropical rainforest and wetland vegetation zones with limited road and trail access. Twenty-one 100 x 100 m blocks were selected for study, which included examples of several different vegetation zones. A pedestrian survey of transects through the blocks was conducted, recording two types of errors. Type 1 errors consist of cultural features that are identified in the field, but are not seen in the digital elevation model (DEM) or digital surface model (DSM). Type 2 errors consist of features that appear to be cultural when viewed on the DEM or DSM, but are caused by different vegetative features. Concurrently, we conducted an extensive vegetation survey of each block, identifying major species present and heights of stories. The results demonstrate that the lidar survey data are extremely reliable and a sample can be used to assess data accuracy, fidelity, and confidence over a larger area.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".