MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2913828382 · doi:10.1080/07038992.2018.1540297

Shelterbelt Agroforestry Systems Inventory and Removal Analyzed by Object-based Classification of Satellite Data in Saskatchewan, Canada

2019· article· en· W2913828382 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Thuan Ha, Beyhan Y. Amichev, Kenneth W. Belcher, Murray J. Bentham, Suren Kulshreshtha, Colin P. Laroque, Ken C.J. Van Rees

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Remote Sensing · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAeolian processes and effects
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of Saskatchewan
KeywordsWindbreakLand coverSynthetic aperture radarRemote sensingSatellite imageryGeographyRandom forestVegetation (pathology)Environmental scienceForestryLand useComputer scienceAgroforestryArtificial intelligenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Shelterbelt agroforestry systems inventory is challenging given their narrow linear feature and extensive distribution. The objective of this study was to evaluate the capability of Sentinel-2A Multispectral Instrument (MSI) and Sentinel-1B Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) imagery in (i) delineating shelterbelt tree rows on managed agricultural land in Saskatchewan, Canada, and (ii) detecting shelterbelt removal during the period 2008–2016. Contrast split segmentation for the normalized difference vegetation index and Gaussian filter (line filter) data sets from SAR were used to delineate feature borders. Several feature variables from the spectral bands of MSI were used as inputs for an object-based classification using the random forest classifier. A resulting land cover map, including the linear features of existing shelterbelts, was created with an overall accuracy of 80% and kappa value of 0.69. Shelterbelt change detection analysis using the land cover map (2016) and a legacy shelterbelt inventory map (2008) showed that 354 km of shelterbelts were removed within the study area (1,400 km2), accounting for 29.8% of the total shelterbelt length present in 2008. Our results demonstrated that the combination of Sentinel SAR and MSI imagery can provide sufficient information for mapping future shelterbelt planting, as well as allow the detection of shelterbelt removal.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.779
Threshold uncertainty score0.571

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations15
Published2019
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Remote SensingSame topicAeolian processes and effectsFrench-language works237,207