Analyzing the Effects of Temporal Resolution and Classification Confidence for Modeling Land Cover Change with Long Short-Term Memory Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Land cover change (LCC) is typically characterized by infrequent changes over space and time. Data-driven methods such as deep learning (DL) approaches have proven effective in many domains for predictive and classification tasks. When applied to geospatial data, sequential DL methods such as long short-term memory (LSTM) have yielded promising results in remote sensing and GIScience studies. However, the characteristics of geospatial datasets selected for use with these methods have demonstrated important implications on method performance. The number of data layers available, the rate of LCC, and inherent errors resulting from classification procedures are expected to influence model performance. Yet, it is unknown how these can affect compatibility with the LSTM method. As such, the main objective of this study is to explore the capacity of LSTM to forecast patterns that have emerged from LCC dynamics given varying temporal resolutions, persistent land cover classes, and auxiliary data layers pertaining to classification confidence. Stacked LSTM modeling approaches are applied to 17-year MODIS land cover datasets focused on the province of British Columbia, Canada. This geospatial data is reclassified to four major land cover (LC) classes during pre-processing procedures. The evaluation considers the dataset at variable temporal resolutions to demonstrate the significance of geospatial data characteristics on LSTM method performance in several scenarios. Results indicate that LSTM can be utilized for forecasting LCC patterns when there are few limitations on temporal intervals of the datasets provided. Likewise, this study demonstrates improved performance measures when there are classes that do not change. Furthermore, providing classification confidence data as ancillary input also demonstrated improved results when the number of timesteps or temporal resolution is limited. This study contributes to future applications of DL and LSTM methods for forecasting LCC.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".