MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2982226510 · doi:10.4095/220051

Forest Cover Indicator Based on Multi-scale Remote Sensing Information

2003· report· en· W2982226510 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sylvain G. Leblanc, Wenjun Chen, Richard Fernandes

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCover (algebra)Scale (ratio)Remote sensingForest coverEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceGeographyCartographyEcologyEngineeringBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Forests cover nearly half of Canada's landmass. While forested lands are often viewed as areas of wood production, forests also provide wildlife habitat and ecosystem mechanisms to clean air and water, and sequester carbon. Measuring the area of forested land in Canada on a regular basis provides an indicator of the availability of these important ecosystem services. This study examines the capability of coarse spatial resolution satellite data to quantify forest cover based on crown closure estimates. Field data, high and medium resolution remote sensing imageries, and a canopy radiative transfer model (Five-Scale) are used to assess the mapping potential of 1-km data, such as AVHRR, VGT and MODIS. The main challenge of the research is in the transition zone between boreal forest and the tundra, where few inventory data are available and the trees are found in clusters. The results will be used in a Canada-wide forest indicator that aimed at monitoring yearly changes in the forest extend due in part to forest fires, insect defoliation, regrowth and changes due to climate change. Different methodologies and initial results of this ongoing activity are presented.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.611
Threshold uncertainty score0.783

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations3
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207