MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3048337658 · doi:10.1007/s10980-020-01080-y

Spatial patterns of logging-related disturbance events: a multi-scale analysis on forest management units located in the Brazilian Amazon

2020· article· en· W3048337658 on OpenAlexafffund
Thaís Almeida Lima, René Beuchle, Verena C. Griess, Astrid Verhegghen, Peter Vogt

Bibliographic record

VenueLandscape Ecology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersJoint Research CentreUniversity of British ColumbiaInternational Tropical Timber OrganizationEuropean CommissionIdea Wild
KeywordsLoggingDisturbance (geology)Forest managementAmazon rainforestFellingContext (archaeology)Salvage loggingEnvironmental scienceSpatial ecologySustainable forest managementGeographyForest ecologyEcologyForestryAgroforestryEcosystemGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Context Selective logging has been commonly mapped using binary maps, representing logged and unlogged forests. However, binary maps may fall short regarding the optimum representation of this type of disturbance, as tree harvest in tropical forests can be highly heterogeneous. Objectives The objective of this study is to map forest disturbance intensities in areas of selective logging located in the Brazilian Amazon. Methods Selective logging activities were mapped in ten forest management units using Sentinel-2 data at 10 m resolution. A spatial pattern analysis was applied to the logging map, using a moving window approach with different window sizes. Two landscape metrics were used to derive a forest disturbance intensity map. This map was then compared with actual disturbances using field data and a post-harvest forest recovery analysis. Results Disturbed areas were grouped into five distinct disturbance intensity classes, from very low to very high. Classes high and very high were found to be related to log landings and large felling gaps, while very low intensities were mainly related to isolated disturbance types. The post-harvest forest recovery analysis showed that the five classes can be clearly distinguished from one another, with the clearest differences in the year of logging and one year after it. Conclusions The approach described represents an important step towards a better mapping of selectively logged areas, when compared to the use of binary maps. The disturbance intensity classes could be used as indicators for forest monitoring as well as for further evaluation of areas under forest management.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations18
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLandscape EcologySame topicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207