MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4292554566 · doi:10.3390/rs14164097

Mapping Two Decades of New York State Forest Aboveground Biomass Change Using Remote Sensing

2022· article· en· W4292554566 on OpenAlexaff
Haifa Tamiminia, Bahram Salehi, Masoud Mahdianpari, Colin M. Beier, Lucas K. Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNational Institute of Food and AgricultureNew York State Department of Environmental ConservationEuropean Social FundState University of New YorkU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsRandom forestEnvironmental scienceCarbon sinkClimate changeRemote sensingDeciduousLidarComputer scienceGeographyMachine learningEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Forest aboveground biomass (AGB) provides valuable information about the carbon cycle, carbon sink monitoring, and understanding of climate change factors. Remote sensing data coupled with machine learning models have been increasingly used for forest AGB estimation over local and regional extents. Landsat series provide a 50-year data archive, which is a valuable source for historical mapping over large areas. As such, this paper proposed a machine learning-based workflow for historical AGB estimation and its change analysis from 2001 to 2019 for the New York State’s forests using Landsat historical imagery, airborne LiDAR, and forest plot data. As the object-based image analysis (OBIA) is able to incorporate spectral, contextual, and textural features into the regression model, the proposed method utilizes an OBIA approach and a random forest (RF) regression model implemented on the Google Earth Engine (GEE) cloud computing platform. Results demonstrated that there is a considerable decrease of 983.79 × 106 Mg/ha in the AGB of deciduous forests from 2001 to 2006, followed by an increase of 618.28 × 106 Mg/ha from 2006 to 2011, continued with an increase of 229.12 × 106 Mg/ha of deciduous forests from 2011–2016. Finally, the results demonstrated a slight change in AGB from 2016 to 2019. The transferability of the proposed framework provides a practical solution for monitoring forests in other states or even on a national 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.948
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207