Advanced Method to Capture the Time-Lag Effects between Annual NDVI and Precipitation Variation Using RNN in the Arid and Semi-Arid Grasslands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The latest research indicates that there are time-lag effects between the normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) and the precipitation variation. It is well known that the time-lags are different from region to region, and there are time-lags for the NDVI itself correlated to the precipitation. In the arid and semi-arid grasslands, the annual NDVI has proved not only to be highly dependent on the precipitation of the concurrent year and previous years, but also the NDVI of previous years. This paper proposes a method using recurrent neural network (RNN) to capture both time-lags of the NDVI with respect to the NDVI itself, and of the NDVI with respect to precipitation. To quantitatively capture these time-lags, 16 years of the NDVI and precipitation data are used to construct the prediction model of the NDVI with respect to precipitation. This study focuses on the arid and semi-arid Hulunbuir grasslands dominated by perennials in northeast China. Using RNN, the time-lag effects are captured at a 1 year time-lag of precipitation and a 2 year time-lag of the NDVI. The successful capture of the time-lag effects provides significant value for the accurate prediction of vegetation variation for arid and semi-arid grasslands.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".