MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3134883029 · doi:10.3390/rs13040816

Landsat and Sentinel-2 Based Burned Area Mapping Tools in Google Earth Engine

2021· article· en· W3134883029 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ekhi Roteta, Aitor Bastarrika, Magí Franquesa, Emilio Chuvieco

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRemote sensingGeospatial analysisComputer scienceCartographyMeteorologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Four burned area tools were implemented in Google Earth Engine (GEE), to obtain regular processes related to burned area (BA) mapping, using medium spatial resolution sensors (Landsat and Sentinel-2). The four tools are (i) the BA Cartography tool for supervised burned area over the user-selected extent and period, (ii) two tools implementing a BA stratified random sampling to select the scenes and dates for validation, and (iii) the BA Reference Perimeter tool to obtain highly accurate BA maps that focus on validating coarser BA products. Burned Area Mapping Tools (BAMTs) go beyond the previously implemented Burned Area Mapping Software (BAMS) because of GEE parallel processing capabilities and preloaded geospatial datasets. BAMT also allows temporal image composites to be exploited in order to obtain BA maps over a larger extent and longer temporal periods. The tools consist of four scripts executable from the GEE Code Editor. The tools’ performance was discussed in two case studies: in the 2019/2020 fire season in Southeast Australia, where the BA cartography detected more than 50,000 km2, using Landsat data with commission and omission errors below 12% when compared to Sentinel-2 imagery; and in the 2018 summer wildfires in Canada, where it was found that around 16,000 km2 had burned.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.008

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations101
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207