MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3137446047 · doi:10.1080/10095020.2021.1894906

Collaborative validation of GlobeLand30: Methodology and practices

2021· article· en· W3137446047 on OpenAlexaff
Jun Chen, Lijun Chen, Yifang Ban, Songnian Li, Gang Han, Xiaohua Tong, Chuang LIU, Stefan Stamenov

Bibliographic record

VenueGeo-spatial Information Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLand Use and Ecosystem Services
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

30-m Global Land Cover (GLC) data products permit the detection of land cover changes at the scale of most human land activities, and are therefore used as fundamental information for sustainable development, environmental change studies, and many other societal benefit areas. In the past few years, increasing efforts have been devoted to the accuracy assessment of GlobeLand30 and other finer-resolution GLC data products. However, most of them were conducted either within a limited percentage of map sheets selected from a global scale or in some individual countries (areas), and there are still many areas where the uncertainty of 30-m resolution GLC data products remains to be validated and documented. In order to promote a comprehensive and collaborative validation of 30-m GLC data products, the GEO Global Land Cover Community Activity had organized a project from 2015 to 2017, to examine and explore its major problems, including the lack of international agreed validation guidelines and on-line tools for facilitating collaborative validation activities. With the joint effort of experts and users from 30 GEO member countries or participating organizations, a technical specification for 30-m GLC validation was developed based on the findings and experiences. An on-line validation tool, GLCVal, was developed by integrating land cover validation procedures with the service computing technologies. About 20 countries (regions) have completed the accuracy assessment of GlobeLand30 for their territories with the guidance of the technical specification and the support of GLCVal.

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)0.109
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.132
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.109
Threshold uncertainty score0.577

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1090.132
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0120.008
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0070.011
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.007

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.288 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations64
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeo-spatial Information ScienceSame topicLand Use and Ecosystem ServicesFrench-language works237,207