Assessing Historical Maps for Characterizing Fluvial Corridor Changes at a Regional Network Scale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fluvial corridor quality assessment requires that historical data be collected at a regional scale. In this article, our goal is to assess potential map resources to explore riverscape changes at a regional network scale and to define key issues in using an automated vectorization protocol to characterize such changes on such a large scale. We consider IGN’s Nouvelle Carte de France a potentially good resource for our objective of two-date (oldest + actual vector database) comparisons on 1:20,000–1:25,000 scale maps, notably when applied at a regional scale. The French IGN corpus is a good example of topographic maps that were produced in the twentieth century in Europe with fairly homogeneous data over a whole national territory. Moreover, the digitization and georeferencing processes applied by IGN are very accurate. The evolution of conventional features is not as significant for the hydrographic theme and should not be a problem for automatic vectorization. The potential temporal coverage is from 1922 to 1993, but the complexity of the sheet divisions, partial revisions, and the heterogeneity of coverage over time prevent multidate analysis.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".