MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2999172600 · doi:10.3390/su12020577

Ranking Importance of Topographical Surface and Subsurface Parameters on Paludification in Northern Boreal Forests Using Very High Resolution Remotely Sensed Datasets

2020· article· en· W2999172600 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ahmed Laamrani, Osvaldo Valeria

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTopographic Wetness IndexEnvironmental scienceGround-penetrating radarPhysical geographyNormalized Difference Vegetation IndexGeologyHydrology (agriculture)Climate changeRadarRemote sensingGeographyDigital elevation modelOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The accumulation of organic material on top of the mineral soil over time (a process called paludification) is common in Northern Boreal coniferous forests. This natural process leads to a marked decrease in forest productivity overtime. Topography both at the surface of the forest floor (i.e., above ground) and the subsurface (i.e., top of mineral soil which is underground) is known to play a critical role in the paludification process. Until recently, the availability of more accurate topographic information regarding the surface and subsurface was a limiting factor for land management and modeling of spatial organic layer thickness (OLT) variability, a proxy for paludification. However so far, no research has assessed which of these two topographic variables has the greatest influence on paludification. This study aims to assess which topographic variable (surface or subsurface) better explains paludification, using high-resolution remote sensing technology (i.e., Light Detection and Ranging: LiDAR and Ground Penetrating Radar: GPR). To this end, field soil measurements were made in over 1614 sites distributed throughout the reference Valrennes Experimental site in Canadian northern coniferous forests. Then, a machine learning model (i.e., Random Forest, RF) was implemented to rank a set of selected predictor topographic variables (i.e., slope, aspect, mean curvature, plan curvature, profile curvature, and topographic wetness index) using the Mean Decrease Gini (MDG) index as an indicator of importance. Results showed that overall 83% of the overall variance was explained by the RF selected model, while the derived subsurface topography predictors had the lowest MDGs for predicting paludification. On the other hand, the surface slope predictor had the highest MDGs and better explained paludification. This finding would be particularly useful for implanting sustainable management strategies based on the surface variables of paludified northern boreal forests. This study has also highlighted the potential of LiDAR data to provide surface topographic spatial detail information for planning and optimizing forest management activities in paludified boreal forests. This is even of great importance when we know that LiDAR variables are easier to obtain compared to GPR derived variables (subsurface topographic variables).

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.143

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207