MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399241163 · doi:10.1038/s41597-024-03384-z

A labelled dataset to classify direct deforestation drivers from Earth Observation imagery in Cameroon

2024· article· en· W4399241163 on OpenAlexaff
Amandine Debus, Emilie Beauchamp, James Acworth, Achille Ewolo, Justin Kamga, Astrid Verhegghen, Christiane Zébazé, Emily R. Lines

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Data · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing in Agriculture
Canadian institutionsInternational Institute for Sustainable Development
FundersNatural Environment Research CouncilResearch Councils UK
KeywordsDeforestation (computer science)Earth (classical element)Remote sensingGeographyGeologyEnvironmental scienceEarth sciencePhysical geographyComputer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding direct deforestation drivers at a fine spatial and temporal scale is needed to design appropriate measures for forest management and monitoring. To achieve this, reference datasets with which to design Artificial Intelligence (AI) approaches to classify direct deforestation drivers within areas experiencing forest loss in a detailed, comprehensive and locally-adapted way are needed. This is the case for Cameroon, in the Congo Basin, which has known increasing deforestation rates in recent years. Here, we created an Earth Observation dataset with associated labels to classify detailed direct deforestation drivers in Cameroon, which includes satellite imagery (Landsat and PlanetScope) and auxiliary data on infrastructure and biophysical properties. The dataset provides the following fifteen labels: oil palm, timber, fruit, rubber and other-large scale plantations; grassland/shrubland; small-scale oil palm or maize plantations and other small-scale agriculture; mining; selective logging; infrastructure; wildfires; hunting; and other.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.340
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.003

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.233 · 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.

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific DataSame topicRemote Sensing in AgricultureFrench-language works237,207