OpenForest: a data catalog for machine learning in forest monitoring
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Forests play a crucial role in the Earth’s system processes and provide a suite of social and economic ecosystem services, but are significantly impacted by human activities, leading to a pronounced disruption of the equilibrium within ecosystems. Advancing forest monitoring worldwide offers advantages in mitigating human impacts and enhancing our comprehension of forest composition, alongside the effects of climate change. While statistical modeling has traditionally found applications in forest biology, recent strides in machine learning and computer vision have reached important milestones using remote sensing data, such as tree species identification, tree crown segmentation, and forest biomass assessments. For this, the significance of open-access data remains essential in enhancing such data-driven algorithms and methodologies. Here, we provide a comprehensive and extensive overview of 86 open-access forest datasets across spatial scales, encompassing inventories, ground-based, aerial-based, satellite-based recordings, and country or world maps. These datasets are grouped in OpenForest, a dynamic catalog open to contributions that strives to reference all available open-access forest datasets. Moreover, in the context of these datasets, we aim to inspire research in machine learning applied to forest biology by establishing connections between contemporary topics, perspectives, and challenges inherent in both domains. We hope to encourage collaborations among scientists, fostering the sharing and exploration of diverse datasets through the application of machine learning methods for large-scale forest monitoring. OpenForest is available at the following url: https://github.com/RolnickLab/OpenForest .
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 | 0.006 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.016 | 0.019 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.027 |
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".