MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4253599300 · doi:10.4095/220712

Satellite based standardized terrain maps: a case study

2003· report· en· W4253599300 on OpenAlexaffabout
V Singhroy, P Barnett

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGeographic Information Systems Studies
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerrainSatelliteRemote sensingGeographyComputer scienceCartographyGeodesyEngineeringAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Ontario Geological Survey and the Canada Centre for Remote Sensing are currently preparing a series of satellite based terrain maps for a 250,000 square kilometer area of the boreal forest region in Northwest Ontario. The purpose of this provincial and federal mapping program is to produce a series of 1:100 000 standardized, satellite based engineering-terrain maps that will be published as a provincial map series. The terrain maps are being used to plan forestry roads and other civil engineering works in support of forest harvesting programs in the region. They are also used to verify forest productivity models in the boreal forest. This paper presents the interpretation methodologies and examples of the satellite based standardized terrain maps. Our results show that image maps produced from a combination of DEM and TM can provide a base on which to interpret and overlay engineering terrain units at a scale of 1:100,000 for large areas of the boreal forest regions in northern Canada. This method will result in considerable savings in time and cost when compared to traditional air photo methods.

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)0.005
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.483
Threshold uncertainty score0.960

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.309 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeographic Information Systems Studies→French-language works237,207→