MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3113380481 · doi:10.1109/mgrs.2020.3032713

Lidar Boosts 3D Ecological Observations and Modelings: A Review and Perspective

2020· review· en· W3113380481 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

VenueIEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Magazine · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsLidarVegetation (pathology)Remote sensingRange (aeronautics)EcosystemGrasslandEnvironmental scienceGrassland ecosystemEcologyGeographyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The advent of lidar has revolutionized the way we observe and measure vegetation structure from the ground and from above and represents a major advance toward the quantification of 3D ecological observations. Developments in lidar hardware systems and data processing algorithms have greatly improved the accessibility and ease of use of lidar observations in ecological studies. A wide range of studies has been devoted to accurately measuring and modeling vegetation structural and functional attributes from lidar data across a range of spatial scales (from individual organs to global scales) and ecosystem types (e.g., forest, agricultural, grassland, and urban ecosystems).

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.997
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.257 · 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