MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2891686592 · doi:10.5334/dsj-2018-020

Using Classified and Unclassified Land Cover Data to Estimate the Footprint of Human Settlement

2018· article· en· W2891686592 on OpenAlexaff
Charlie Frye, E. A. Nordstrand, Dawn J. Wright, Carmelle Terborgh, Jeanne Foust

Bibliographic record

VenueData Science Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicImpact of Light on Environment and Health
Canadian institutionsEsri (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeographyPopulationFootprintLand coverCartographySettlement (finance)OrthophotoAncillary dataGeoreferenceCensusRemote sensingLand useComputer sciencePhysical geographyArchaeologyEcologyWorld Wide WebDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurate, up-to-date maps of and georeferenced data about human population distribution are essential for meeting the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals progress measures, for supporting real-time crisis mapping and response efforts, and for performing many demographic and economic analyses. In December 2014, Esri published the initial version of the World Population Estimate (WPE) image service to ArcGIS Online. The service represents a dasymetric footprint of human settlement at 250-meter resolution. It is global and contains an estimate of the 2013 population for each populated cell. In 2016 Esri published an additional image service representing the earth’s population in 2015 at 162-meter resolution. Esri’s WPE is produced by combining classified land cover data indicating predominantly built-up or agricultural locations with Landsat8 Panchromatic imagery, road intersections, and known populated places. The model detects where settlement is likely to exist beyond the areas classified as predominantly built up. The result is a global dasymetric raster surface of the footprint of settlement with a score of the likelihood of human settlement for each cell of the footprint. Population data are apportioned to this settlement likelihood surface by overlaying population counts in polygons representing census enumeration units or political units representing population surveys. This paper presents the method developed at Esri for producing the estimate of settlement likelihood.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.091

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.008
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.239
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations45
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueData Science JournalSame topicImpact of Light on Environment and HealthFrench-language works237,207