MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410487716 · doi:10.1016/j.ecoinf.2025.103174

A novel approach to mapping and monitoring land carbon sinks by combining remote sensing and biogeochemical modeling: A case study in Burkina Faso

2025· article· en· W4410487716 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEcological Informatics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsEsri (Canada)
FundersHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeEuropean Commission
KeywordsBiogeochemical cycleRemote sensingCarbon sinkEnvironmental scienceCarbon fibersCarbon fluxLand coverLand useGeographyEnvironmental resource managementComputer scienceEcologyEcosystemBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurate and timely estimation of carbon sequestration in soil and forest biomass is crucial for applications such as carbon stock assessment, forest degradation monitoring, and climate change mitigation. Traditional methods such as field inventories, remote sensing, and biogeochemical models each have strengths and limitations, particularly in data-scarce regions. To address these challenges, this study integrates the light-use efficiency ETLook model, which is driven by remotely sensed data, with the biogeochemical model DayCent, which is driven by management and weather data, to spatially model aboveground biomass and carbon sequestration. This novel approach aims to improve carbon sequestration estimates in a case study area in Burkina Faso, where ongoing political instability severely limits the availability of field data. In the absence of ground-truth data, we compare the outputs from DayCent and ETLook across time and space to build confidence in our estimates. Our findings indicate that, despite being driven by different input data, the DayCent model closely matches the aboveground biomass patterns observed in the ETLook model, with an r 2 value of 0.81, a Kling-Gupta efficiency (KGE) of 0.77, low bias, and consistent seasonal patterns. Since ETLook lacks a soil carbon module, combining its Net Primary Productivity (NPP) and growth estimates with DayCent’s soil organic carbon (SOC) outputs provides a more robust estimate of total carbon sequestration than either model alone. Future work will focus on applying this hybrid approach across different ecological and geographical regions to evaluate its broader applicability.

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.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.946
Threshold uncertainty score0.436

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 science0.0000.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.220 · 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