MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367183710 · doi:10.3390/rs15092289

Mapping Alpine Grassland Fraction Coverage Using Zhuhai-1 OHS Imagery in the Three River Headwaters Region, China

2023· article· en· W4367183710 on OpenAlexafffund
Fei Xing, Ru An, Xulin Guo, Xiaoji Shen, Irini Soubry, Benlin Wang, Yanmei Mu, Xianglin Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing in Agriculture
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersAnhui Provincial Department of EducationChina Scholarship CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsEndmemberGrasslandRemote sensingHyperspectral imagingEnvironmental scienceScale (ratio)Multispectral imageSatellite imageryPixelPhysical geographyGeographyCartographyEcologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The widely spread alpine grassland ecosystem in the Three River Headwaters Region (TRHR) plays an essential ecological role in carbon sequestration and soil and water conservation. In this study, we test the latest high spatial resolution hyperspectral (Zhuhai-1 OHS) remote sensing imagery to examine different alpine grassland coverage levels using Multiple Endmember Spectral Mixture Analysis (MESMA). Our results suggest that the 3-endmember (3-EM) MESMA model can provide the highest image pixel unmixing percentage, with a percentage exceeding 97% and 96% for pixel scale and landscape scale, respectively. The overall accuracy shows that Zhuhai-1 OHS imagery obtained the highest overall accuracy (83.7%, k = 0.77) in the landscape scale, but in the pixel scale, it is not as good as Landsat 8 OLI imagery. Overall, we can conclude that the hyperspectral imagery combined 3-EM MESMA model performs better in both pixel scale and landscape scale alpine grassland coverage mapping, while the multispectral imagery with the 3-EM MESMA model can satisfy requirements of alpine grassland coverage mapping at the pixel scale. The approaches and workflow to mapping alpine grassland in this study can help monitor alpine grassland degradation; not only in the Qinghai–Tibetan Plateau (QTP), but also in other grassland ecosystems.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.115

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicRemote Sensing in AgricultureFrench-language works237,207