MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4236239527 · doi:10.5194/bg-2019-20

Assessing the peatland hummock-hollow classification framework using high-resolution elevation models: Implications for appropriate complexity ecosystem modelling

2019· preprint· en· W4236239527 on OpenAlexafffund
Paul Moore, Maxwell Lukenbach, Dan K. Thompson, Nicholas Kettridge, Gustaf Granath, J. M. Waddington

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology
Canadian institutionsCanadian Forest ServiceNatural Resources CanadaMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPeatEnvironmental scienceBiogeochemical cycleElevation (ballistics)Vegetation (pathology)Range (aeronautics)EcosystemSoil scienceGeologyEcologyGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. The hummock-hollow classification framework used to categorize peatland ecosystem microtopography is pervasive throughout peatland experimental designs and current peatland ecosystem modelling approaches. However, identifying what constitutes a representative hummock-hollow pair within a site and characterizing hummock-hollow variability within or between peatlands remains largely unassessed. Using structure-from-motion (SfM), high resolution digital elevation models (DEM) of hummock-hollow microtopography were used to: 1) examined how much area needs to be sampled to characterize site-level microtopographic variation; and 2) examine the potential role of microtopographic shape/structure on biogeochemical fluxes using data from 9 norther peatlands. To capture 95 % of site-level microtopographic variability, on average an aggregate sampling area of 32 m2 composed of ten randomly located plots with vegetation removed was required. We further present non-destructive transect-based results as an alternative to the SfM approach. Microtopography at the plot-level was often found to be non-bimodal, as assessed using a Gaussian mixture model (GMM). Our findings suggest that the non-bimodal distribution of microtopography at the plot-level may result in an under-sampling of intermediate topographic position. Extended to the modelling domain, an under-representation of intermediate microtopographic positions is shown to lead to large flux biases over a wide range of water table positions for ecosystem processes which are non-linearly related to water and energy availability at the moss surface. A range of tools examined herein can be used to easily parameterize peatland models, from GMMs used as simple transfer functions, to spatially explicit fractal landscapes based on simple power law relations between microtopographic variability and scale.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.173
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.160 · 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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology→French-language works237,207→