MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2984925010 · doi:10.3390/s19224891

Development of Land-Use/Land-Cover Maps Using Landsat-8 and MODIS Data, and Their Integration for Hydro-Ecological Applications

2019· article· en· W2984925010 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Sadia Afrin, Anil Gupta, Babak Farjad, M. Razu Ahmed, Gopal Achari, Quazi K. Hassan

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing in Agriculture
Canadian institutionsAlberta Environment and Protected AreasUniversity of Calgary
FundersAlberta Biodiversity Monitoring InstituteU.S. Geological SurveyAlberta Environment and ParksNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsWatershedLand coverEnvironmental scienceRemote sensingLand useModerate-resolution imaging spectroradiometerVegetation (pathology)DeciduousThematic MapperGeospatial analysisHydrology (agriculture)CartographyGeographySatellite imageryComputer scienceEcologyGeologySatellite

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Athabasca River watershed plays a dominant role in both the economy and the environment in Alberta, Canada. Natural and anthropogenic factors rapidly changed the landscape of the watershed in recent decades. The dynamic of such changes in the landscape characteristics of the watershed calls for a comprehensive and up-to-date land-use and land-cover (LULC) map, which could serve different user-groups and purposes. The aim of the study herein was to delineate a 2016 LULC map of the Athabasca River watershed using Landsat-8 Operational Land Imager (OLI) images, Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS)-derived enhanced vegetation index (EVI) images, and other ancillary data. In order to achieve this, firstly, a preliminary LULC map was developed through applying the iterative self-organizing data analysis (ISODATA) clustering technique on 24 scenes of Landsat-8 OLI. Secondly, a Terra MODIS-derived 250-m 16-day composite of 30 EVI images over the growing season was employed to enhance the vegetation classes. Thirdly, several geospatial ancillary datasets were used in the post-classification improvement processes to generate a final 2016 LULC map of the study area, exhibiting 14 LULC classes. Fourthly, an accuracy assessment was carried out to ensure the reliability of the generated final LULC classes. The results, with an overall accuracy and Cohen's kappa of 74.95% and 68.34%, respectively, showed that coniferous forest (47.30%), deciduous forest (16.76%), mixed forest (6.65%), agriculture (6.37%), water (6.10%), and developed land (3.78%) were the major LULC classes of the watershed. Fifthly, to support the data needs of scientists across various disciplines, data fusion techniques into the LULC map were performed using the Alberta merged wetland inventory 2017 data. The results generated two useful maps applicable for hydro-ecological applications. Such maps depicted two specific categories including different types of burned (approximately 6%) and wetland (approximately 30%) classes. In fact, these maps could serve as important decision support tools for policy-makers and local regulatory authorities in the sustainable management of the Athabasca River watershed.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.449
Threshold uncertainty score0.228

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 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

Citations49
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicRemote Sensing in AgricultureFrench-language works237,207