MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392059702 · doi:10.1029/2023ef004007

30 m Resolution Global Maps of Forest Soil Respiration and Its Changes From 2000 to 2020

2024· article· en· W4392059702 on OpenAlexafffund
Zhengyong Zhao, Xiaogang Ding, Guangyu Wang, Yingying Li

Bibliographic record

VenueEarth s Future · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersUniversity of British ColumbiaAsia-Pacific Network for Sustainable Forest Management and Rehabilitation
KeywordsSoil respirationRespirationEnvironmental scienceResolution (logic)Soil scienceForestryPhysical geographyHydrology (agriculture)GeographyGeologyComputer scienceBiologySoil waterBotanyGeotechnical engineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 r 2 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 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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.586
Threshold uncertainty score0.520

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations11
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEarth s FutureSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207