MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2612061294 · doi:10.1080/24694452.2017.1309964

Global Spatial–Temporal Variability in Terrestrial Productivity and Phenology Regimes between 2000 and 2012

2017· article· en· W2612061294 on OpenAlexafffund
Shanley D. Thompson, Trisalyn Nelson, Nicholas C. Coops, Michael A. Wulder, Trevor C. Lantz

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the American Association of Geographers · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing in Agriculture
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources CanadaCanadian Forest ServiceUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Victoria
FundersUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsTundraEnvironmental sciencePhenologySpatial variabilitySpatial ecologyPhotosynthetically active radiationShrublandCommon spatial patternPhysical geographyEcosystemVegetation (pathology)SeasonalityPrimary productionProductivityClimatologyGeographyEcologyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The productivity and phenology of vegetation are spatially and temporally variable ecosystem functions. Monitoring spatial–temporal patterns in these functions can improve our understanding of global change and natural ecosystem variability and inform management actions. Researchers typically focus on temporal changes within or among static regions and omit dynamics of spatial configuration. Our goal was to assess global spatial–temporal variability in productivity and phenology regimes between 2000 and 2012 using a temporally dynamic functional type classification. Fourteen functional types were defined for each year by clustering the annual sum and annual variability (seasonality) of the fraction of photosynthetically active radiation (fPAR)—a biophysical proxy for vegetation greenness or productivity—from the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectrometer (MODIS). The fourteen functional types ranged from tundra (low cumulative fPAR and highly seasonal) to tropical forests (high cumulative fPAR and low seasonality). Variability in the mean of the fPAR metrics and in two spatial pattern metrics was assessed for each functional type. Many pixels changed from one cluster to another then back again, suggesting considerable short-term variability. Temporal variability in the mean of the fPAR metrics was relatively low, with changes instead primarily manifested in spatial pattern. Spatial pattern was most variable within tundra, grasslands, shrublands, and savannas. A dynamic classification demonstrated the variability in spatial patterns of primary productivity and can be used for future monitoring.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.974

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.257 · 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.

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

Citations9
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of the American Association of GeographersSame topicRemote Sensing in AgricultureFrench-language works237,207