Assessment of ecosystems: A system for rigorous and rapid mapping of floodplain forest condition for Australia's most important river
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Methods that provide rapid assessments of changing ecosystems at multiple scales are needed to inform management to address undesirable change. We developed a remote‐sensing method in partnership with, and for use by, natural resource managers to predict annually stand condition of floodplain forests along Australia's longest river, the Murray River. A measure of stand condition, which was developed in collaboration with responsible natural resource managers, is a function of plant area index, crown extent, and the percentage live basal area. We surveyed a broad range of spatial and temporal variation in condition, built predictive stand‐condition models using satellite‐derived variables, and validated predictions with surveys of new sites. A multiyear model using data from 2 drought years and a year following extensive floods provided better predictions of stand condition than did models on the basis of the data for individual years. The model provided good predictions for data collected after the build for 50 sites and for resurveys of build sites in later years (R2 ≥ 0.86). There was limited, temporary improvement in stand condition after the extensive flooding (2010 to late 2010) that followed a 13‐year (1997 to early 2010) drought. Forest condition can be mapped accurately and annually at medium resolution (25 × 25 m) for large areas (100,000s ha) if quantitative ground surveys, satellite imagery, machine learning, and future validation are combined. Regular assessments of forest condition can be related to likely causes of change by using regular, rapid assessments and hence can provide important management information.
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 | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".