MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387638490 · doi:10.3390/rs15204960

Rapid Large-Scale Wetland Inventory Update Using Multi-Source Remote Sensing

2023· article· en· W4387638490 on OpenAlexaff
Victor Igwe, Bahram Salehi, Masoud Mahdianpari

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing in Agriculture
Canadian institutionsCentre For Cold Ocean Resources EngineeringMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersMinnesota Department of Natural Resources
KeywordsWetlandRemote sensingEnvironmental scienceThresholdingNormalized Difference Vegetation IndexPixelRandom forestComputer scienceEnvironmental resource managementHydrology (agriculture)GeographyClimate changeMachine learningArtificial intelligenceEcologyImage (mathematics)Geology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rapid impacts from both natural and anthropogenic sources on wetland ecosystems underscore the need for updating wetland inventories. Extensive up-to-date field samples are required for calibrating methods (e.g., machine learning) and validating results (e.g., maps). The purpose of this study is to design a dataset generation approach that extracts training data from already existing wetland maps in an unsupervised manner. The proposed method utilizes the LandTrendr algorithm to identify areas least likely to have changed over a seven-year period from 2016 to 2022 in Minnesota, USA. Sentinel-2 and Sentinel-1 data were used through Google Earth Engine (GEE), and sub-pixel water fraction (SWF) and normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) were considered as wetland indicators. A simple thresholding approach was applied to the magnitude of change maps to identify pixels with the most negligible change. These samples were then employed to train a random forest (RF) classifier in an object-based image analysis framework. The proposed method achieved an overall accuracy of 89% with F1 scores of 91%, 81%, 88%, and 72% for water, emergent, forested, and scrub-shrub wetland classes, respectively. The proposed method offers an accurate and cost-efficient method for updating wetland inventories as well as studying areas impacted by floods on state or even national scales. This will assist practitioners and stakeholders in maintaining an updated wetland map with fewer requirements for extensive field campaigns.

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)0.002
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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