MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392232763 · doi:10.3390/rs16050831

Integrating SAR and Optical Data for Aboveground Biomass Estimation of Coastal Wetlands Using Machine Learning: Multi-Scale Approach

2024· article· en· W4392232763 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammadali Hemati, Masoud Mahdianpari, Hodjat Shiri, Fariba Mohammadimanesh

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCoastal wetland ecosystem dynamics
Canadian institutionsCentre For Cold Ocean Resources EngineeringMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWetlandRemote sensingScale (ratio)Environmental scienceBiomass (ecology)EstimationComputer scienceOceanographyGeologyEcologyCartographyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Coastal wetlands encompass diverse ecosystems such as tidal marshes, mangroves, and seagrasses, which harbor substantial amounts of carbon (C) within their vegetation and soils. Despite their relatively small global extent, these wetlands exhibit carbon sequestration rates on par with those observed in terrestrial forests. The application of remote sensing technologies offers a promising means of monitoring aboveground biomass (AGB) in wetland environments. However, the scarcity of field data poses a significant challenge to the utilization of spaceborne data for accurate estimation of AGB in coastal wetlands. To address this limitation, this study presents a novel multi-scale approach that integrates field data, aerial imaging, and satellite platforms to generate high-quality biomass maps across varying scales. At the fine scale level, the AVIRIS-NG hyperspectral data were employed to develop a model for estimating AGB with an exceptional spatial resolution of 5 m. Subsequently, at a broader scale, large-scale and multitemporal models were constructed using spaceborne Sentinel-1 and Sentinel-2 data collected in 2021. The Random Forest (RF) algorithm was utilized to train spring, fall and multi-temporal models using 70% of the available reference data. Using the remaining 30% of untouched data for model validation, Root Mean Square Errors (RMSE) of 0.97, 0.98, and 1.61 Mg ha−1 was achieved for the spring, fall, and multi-temporal models, respectively. The highest R-squared value of 0.65 was achieved for the multi-temporal model. Additionally, the analysis highlighted the importance of various features in biomass estimation, indicating the contribution of different bands and indices. By leveraging the wetland inventory classification map, a comprehensive temporal analysis was conducted to examine the average and total AGB dynamics across various wetland classes. This analysis elucidated the patterns and fluctuations in AGB over time, providing valuable insights into the temporal dynamics of these wetland 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 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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.945
Threshold uncertainty score0.543

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations30
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicCoastal wetland ecosystem dynamicsFrench-language works237,207