MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2555844009 · doi:10.15273/pnsis.v48i2.6660

Mapping the topography and land cover of Sable Island

2016· article· en· W2555844009 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
David Colville, Brittany A. Reeves, Darien Ure, Bill Livingstone, Heather Stewart

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Nova Scotian Institute of Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsParks Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrthophotoAerial photographyGeomaticsGeographyLand coverRemote sensingAerial photosAerial surveyCartographyMosaicLidarGround truthLand useArchaeologyEcologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In September 2014 the Applied Geomatics Research Group (AGRG) completed a third aerial mapping campaign of Sable Island. The AGRG first mapped the island in October 2002 with an aerial photography survey. Then in August 2009 AGRG conducted an aerial photography and Light Detection And Ranging (LiDAR) survey. Five years later these same technologies were deployed again. Each of these surveys led to an orthophoto mosaic of the island and a mapping of the land cover. The 2009 and 2014 surveys also mapped the island’s topography using Digital Surface Models (DSMs) derived from the LiDAR data. Ground-truthing efforts associated with each survey provided data to assist with the interpretation and validation of the results.The repeat surveys resulted in an excellent opportunity to quantify the topographic and land cover changes that have occurred on the island. The mapped results provide a comparison of how and where these changes have occurred over the years. AGRG is working with Parks Canada to better understand how the topography and land cover are changing. This understanding will contribute to Parks Canada Ecological Integrity monitoring program for Sable Island and inform the management planning process for one of Canada’s newest national parks.

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 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 categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.315
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.006
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Nova Scotian Institute of ScienceSame topicSpecies Distribution and Climate ChangeFrench-language works237,207