Ground‐penetrating radar, electromagnetic induction, terrain, and vegetation observations coupled with machine learning to map permafrost distribution at Twelvemile Lake, Alaska
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We collected ground‐penetrating radar (GPR) and frequency‐domain electromagnetic induction (FDEM) profiles in 2011 and 2012 to identify the extent of permafrost relative to surface biomass and solar insolation around Twelvemile Lake near Fort Yukon, Alaska. We compared a Landsat‐derived biomass estimate and modeled solar insolation from a digital elevation model to the geophysical measurements. We show correspondence between vegetation type and biomass relative to permafrost extent and seasonal freeze–thaw. Thicker permafrost (≥25 m) was covered by greater biomass, and seasonal thaw depths in these regions were minimal (1 m). Shallow (1–3 m depth) and thin (20–50 cm) newly forming permafrost or frozen layers from the previous winter occurred below northward oriented slopes with thin biomass cover. South‐facing slopes exhibited permafrost when there was enough biomass to shield incoming solar energy. We developed an artificial neural network to predict permafrost extent across the broader region by mapping GPR‐observed instances of permafrost to FDEM, biomass, and terrain observations with 90.2% accuracy. We identified a strong linear correlation (r = −0.77) between permafrost probability and seasonal thaw depth, indicating that our models may also be used to explore thaw patterns and variability in active layer thickness. This study highlights the combined influence of biomass and terrain on the presence of permafrost and the value of evaluating such parameters via remote sensing to predict permafrost spatial or temporal variability. Incorporating diverse geophysical datasets with in‐situ validation into machine learning models demonstrates a useful approach to upscale estimated permafrost extent across large Arctic expanses.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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".