MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308509844 · doi:10.3390/rs14225630

Tracking Deforestation, Drought, and Fire Occurrence in Kutai National Park, Indonesia

2022· article· en· W4308509844 on OpenAlexafffund
Ryan Guild, Xiuquan Wang, Anne E. Russon

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicOil Palm Production and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityUniversity of Prince Edward Island
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsNational parkGeographyHabitat destructionDeforestation (computer science)WildlifeBiodiversityThreatened speciesTemperate rainforestHabitatEnvironmental scienceEcosystemAgroforestryPhysical geographyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The dry lowland and mangrove forests of Kutai National Park (KNP) in Indonesia provide invaluable ecosystem services to local human populations (>200,000 in number), serve as immense carbon sinks to recapture anthropogenic emissions, and safeguard habitats for thousands of wildlife species including the critically endangered Northeast Bornean orangutan (Pongo pygmaeus morio). With recent reports of ongoing illegal logging and large-scale wildfires within this National Park, we sought to leverage the extensive catalogue and processing power of Google Earth Engine to track the rates and influences of forest loss within KNP over various time periods since 1997. We present estimates of forest loss from the Hansen Global Forest Change v1.9 dataset (2000–2021) which detected a loss of 15% (272 km2) of forest cover within KNP since 2000, half of which (137 km2) coincided with the El Niño-induced wildfires of 2015–2016. Using the MCD64A1 C6.1 MODIS dataset, we found significant spatial overlap between burned area and forest loss detections during the 2015–2016 period but identified considerable omissions in the burned area dataset over smallholder farms within KNP. We discuss the implications of deforestation in areas of primary orangutan habitat and how patterns of forest loss have influenced drought and fire dynamics within KNP. Finally, we compare time-series estimates of precipitation, the ENSO index, burned area, and forest loss to demonstrate that fire risk within KNP depends largely—but not exclusively—on drought severity, and that rates of non-fire (gradual) and fire-related (extreme) forest loss threaten the remaining forests of this National Park.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.819
Threshold uncertainty score0.327

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.236 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations10
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicOil Palm Production and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207