MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W307718644 · doi:10.15786/13703350

Monitoring Aspen Phenology along an Elevation Gradient using MODIS data

2014· article· en· W307718644 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Emily Richardson

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicHorticultural and Viticultural Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhenologyElevation (ballistics)Remote sensingEnvironmental scienceClimatologyGeographyGeologyMathematicsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aspen (Populus tremuloides) are keystone species in many North American ecosystems and are the most extensively distributed species in this landscape. They thrive in a variety of environments, support biodiversity and provide many ecosystem amenities. Despite their resilience and wide distribution, a decline in aspen communities has been observed starting in western Canada and continuing down to the central and southern Rocky Mountains. Monitoring the phenology of aspens can provide insights about factors influencing their decline. Phenology refers to the measurement of the timing of biological events. One way to measure phenology is with remotely sensed data. This study utilizes Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectrometer (MODIS) images acquired during a ten year period, from 2000-2010. Values of the infrared and red bands were extracted from 6 aspen stands located in the Medicine Bow National Forest. NDVI values were derived from these bands, and phenological curves were constructed for each year. From these curves, influences of elevation and weather conditions on aspen phenology were compared.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.306
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.050 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicHorticultural and Viticultural ResearchFrench-language works237,207