A COMPARISON OF TREE-BASED ALGORITHMS FOR COMPLEX WETLAND CLASSIFICATION USING THE GOOGLE EARTH ENGINE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Wetlands are endangered ecosystems that are required to be systematically monitored. Wetlands have significant contributions to the well-being of human-being, fauna, and fungi. They provide vital services, including water storage, carbon sequestration, food security, and protecting the shorelines from floods. Remote sensing is preferred over the other conventional earth observation methods such as field surveying. It provides the necessary tools for the systematic and standardized method of large-scale wetland mapping. On the other hand, new cloud computing technologies for the storage and processing of large-scale remote sensing big data such as the Google Earth Engine (GEE) have emerged. As such, for the complex wetland classification in the pilot site of the Avalon, Newfoundland, Canada, we compare the results of three tree-based classifiers of the Decision Tree (DT), Random Forest (RF), and Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGB) available in the GEE code editor using Sentinel-2 images. Based on the results, the XGB classifier with an overall accuracy of 82.58% outperformed the RF (82.52%) and DT (77.62%) classifiers.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".