MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4394504940 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.5258545

Tree Canopy Change, 2009-2014, Prince George's County, MD

2017· dataset· en· W4394504940 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jarlath O’Neil‐Dunne

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2017
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeorge (robot)CanopyTree (set theory)ForestryGeographyTree canopyArchaeologyHistoryMathematicsArt historyCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This layer is a high-resolution tree canopy change-detection layer for Prince Georges County, Maryland. It contains three tree-canopy classes for the period 2009-2014: (1) No Change; (2) Gain; and (3) Loss. It was created by first mapping tree canopy in 2014 using LiDAR and multispectral data and then comparing the new map directly to an existing tree-canopy map for the year 2009. Tree canopy that existed during both time periods was assigned to the No Change category while trees removed by development, storms, or disease were assigned to the Loss class. Trees planted during the interval were assigned to the Gain category, as were the edges of existing trees that expanded noticeably. Direct comparison was possible because both the 2009 and 2014 maps were created using object-based image analysis (OBIA) and included similar source datasets (LiDAR-derived surface models, multispectral imagery, and thematic GIS inputs). No accuracy assessment was conducted, but the dataset was subjected to comprehensive manual review and correction.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.173

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.018

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshare→Same topicForest ecology and management→French-language works237,207→