MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3035430527 · doi:10.3390/rs12111882

Meta-Analysis of Wetland Classification Using Remote Sensing: A Systematic Review of a 40-Year Trend in North America

2020· review· en· W3035430527 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil erosion and sediment transport
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche ScientifiqueCentre For Cold Ocean Resources EngineeringMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWetlandRemote sensingRecreationEnvironmental scienceHabitatEnvironmental resource managementEcosystemGeographyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

North America is covered in 2.5 million km2 of wetlands, which is the remainder of an estimated 56% of wetlands lost since the 1700s. This loss has resulted in a decrease in important habitat and services of great ecological, economic, and recreational benefits to humankind. To better manage these ecosystems, since the 1970s, wetlands in North America have been classified with increasing regularity using remote sensing technology. Since then, optimal methods for wetland classification by numerous researchers have been examined, assessed, modified, and established. Over the past several decades, a large number of studies have investigated the effects of different remote sensing factors, such as data type, spatial resolution, feature selection, classification methods, and other parameters of interest on wetland classification in North America. However, the results of these studies have not yet been synthesized to determine best practices and to establish avenues for future research. This paper reviews the last 40 years of research and development on North American wetland classification through remote sensing methods. A meta-analysis of 157 relevant articles published since 1980 summarizes trends in 23 parameters, including publication, year, study location, application of specific sensors, and classification methods. This paper also examines is the relationship between several remote sensing parameters (e.g., spatial resolution and type of data) and resulting overall accuracies. Finally, this paper discusses the future of remote sensing of wetlands in North America with regard to upcoming technologies and sensors. Given the increasing importance and vulnerability of wetland ecosystems under the climate change influences, this paper aims to provide a comprehensive review in support of the continued, improved, and novel applications of remote sensing for wetland mapping across North America and to provide a fundamental knowledge base for future studies in this field.

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.

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)0.001
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: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.657
Threshold uncertainty score0.718

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.005
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 head0.201
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.118 · 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