An improved spatial contour tree constructed method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Contours are important data to delineate the landform on a map. A contour tree provides an object-oriented description of landforms and can be used to enrich the topological information. The traditional contour tree is used to store topological relationships between contours in a hierarchical structure and allows for the identification of eminences and depressions as sets of nested contours. This research proposes an improved contour tree so-called spatial contour tree that contains not only the topological but also the geometric information. It can be regarded as a terrain skeleton in 3-dimention, and it is established based on the spatial nodes of contours which have the latitude, longitude and elevation information. The spatial contour tree is built by connecting spatial nodes from low to high elevation for a positive landform, and from high to low elevation for a negative landform to form a hierarchical structure. The connection between two spatial nodes can provide the real distance and direction as a Euclidean vector in 3-dimention. In this paper, the construction method is tested in the experiment, and the results are discussed. The proposed hierarchical structure is in 3-demintion and can show the skeleton inside a terrain. The structure, where all nodes have geo-information, can be used to distinguish different landforms and applied for contour generalization with consideration of geographic characteristics.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".