Reconstructing 34 Years of Fire History in the Wet, Subtropical Vegetation of Hong Kong Using Landsat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Burn-area products from remote sensing provide the backbone for research in fire ecology, management, and modelling. Landsat imagery could be used to create an accurate burn-area map time series at ecologically relevant spatial resolutions. However, the low temporal resolution of Landsat has limited its development in wet tropical and subtropical regions due to high cloud cover and rapid burn-area revegetation. Here, we describe a 34-year Landsat-based burn-area product for wet, subtropical Hong Kong. We overcame technical obstacles by adopting a new LTS fire burn-area detection pipeline that (1) Automatically uniformized Landsat scenes by weighted histogram matching; (2) Estimated pixel resemblance to burn areas based on a random forest model trained on the number of days between the fire event and the date of burn-area detection; (3) Iteratively merged features created by thresholding burn-area resemblance to generate burn-area polygons with detection dates; and (4) Estimated the burn severity of burn-area pixels using a time-series compatible approach. When validated with government fire records, we found that the LTS fire product carried a low area of omission (11%) compared with existing burn-area products, such as GABAM (49%), MCD64A1 (72%), and FireCCI51 (96%) while effectively controlling commission errors. Temporally, the LTS fire pipeline dated 76.9% of burn-area polygons within two months of the actual fire event. The product represents the first Landsat-based burn-area product in wet tropical and subtropical Asia that covers the entire time series. We believe that burn-area products generated from algorithms like LTS fire will effectively bridge the gap between remote sensing and field-based studies on wet tropical and subtropical fire ecology.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".