Google Earth Engine, Open-Access Satellite Data, and Machine Learning in Support of Large-Area Probabilistic Wetland Mapping
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Modern advances in cloud computing and machine-leaning algorithms are shifting the manner in which Earth-observation (EO) data are used for environmental monitoring, particularly as we settle into the era of free, open-access satellite data streams. Wetland delineation represents a particularly worthy application of this emerging research trend, since wetlands are an ecologically important yet chronically under-represented component of contemporary mapping and monitoring programs, particularly at the regional and national levels. Exploiting Google Earth Engine and R Statistical software, we developed a workflow for predicting the probability of wetland occurrence using a boosted regression tree machine-learning framework applied to digital topographic and EO data. Working in a 13,700 km2 study area in northern Alberta, our best models produced excellent results, with AUC (area under the receiver-operator characteristic curve) values of 0.898 and explained-deviance values of 0.708. Our results demonstrate the central role of high-quality topographic variables for modeling wetland distribution at regional scales. Including optical and/or radar variables into the workflow substantially improved model performance, though optical data performed slightly better. Converting our wetland probability-of-occurrence model into a binary Wet-Dry classification yielded an overall accuracy of 85%, which is virtually identical to that derived from the Alberta Merged Wetland Inventory (AMWI): the contemporary inventory used by the Government of Alberta. However, our workflow contains several key advantages over that used to produce the AMWI, and provides a scalable foundation for province-wide monitoring initiatives.
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 | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
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".