Using Landsat time series imagery to detect forest disturbance in selectively logged tropical forests in Myanmar
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Detecting forest disturbances is an important task in formulating mitigation strategies for deforestation and forest degradation in the tropics. Our study investigated the use of Landsat time series imagery combined with a trajectory-based analysis for detecting forest disturbances resulting exclusively from selective logging in Myanmar. Selective logging was the only forest disturbance and degradation indicator used in this study as a causative force, and the results showed that the overall accuracy for forest disturbance detection based on selective logging was 83.0% in the study area. The areas affected by selective logging and other factors accounted for 4.7% and 5.4%, respectively, of the study area from 2000 to 2014. The detected disturbance areas were underestimated according to error assessments; however, a significant correlation between areas of disturbance and numbers of harvested trees during the logging year was observed, indicating the utility of a trajectory-based, annual Landsat imagery time series analysis for selective logging detection in the tropics. A major constraint of this study was the lack of available data for disturbances other than selective logging. Further studies should focus on identifying other types of disturbances and their impacts on future forest conditions.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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 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".