30 m Resolution Global Maps of Forest Soil Respiration and Its Changes From 2000 to 2020
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The soil respiration (Rs) of forests is a major component of global Rs, yet few studies have focused on it. This study aimed to estimate global forest Rs and its changes at a resolution of 30 m via an artificial neural network (ANN) model. Five input candidates representing forest type, climatic, soil, and geographical information, as well as 1472 satisfactory forest Rs records, were used to build the ANN model and evaluate the model performance via a 10‐fold cross‐validation scheme. Global forest change data sets were used to accurately define the extent of forests and their changes, which was achievable because of the dynamic information and high resolution (30 m) of the data sets. The results indicate that the average annual global forest Rs from 2000 to 2020, as estimated by the optimal ANN model with an r2 value of 0.67 and a root‐mean‐square error of 252.6 g C m−2 yr−1, was 46.24 ± 5.86 Pg C yr−1. From 2001 to 2019, the average theoretical annual global forest Rs loss was 0.22 ± 0.06 Pg C yr−1 due to an average forest loss area of 23.4 million ha yr−1. In addition, the annual Rs theoretically increased by 0.75 Pg C in 2012 due to a global forest gain area of 80.5 million from 2001 to 2012. The presented data sets of global forest Rs and its changes can provide an accurate benchmark for discussing the carbon cycle and climate change at global to regional scales, even when operating over a small forest area (i.e., dozens of ha), which is a scale that has been ignored in other global Rs studies.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".