MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412042192 · doi:10.5194/essd-17-3219-2025

China's annual forest age dataset at a 30 m spatial resolution from 1986 to 2022

2025· article· en· W4412042192 on OpenAlexaff
Rong Shang, Xudong Lin, Jing M. Chen, Yunjian Liang, Keyan Fang, Mingzhu Xu, Yulin Yan, Weimin Ju, Guirui Yu, Nianpeng He, Li Xu, Liangyun Liu, Jing Li, Li Wang, Jun Zhai, Zhongmin Hu

Bibliographic record

VenueEarth system science data · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Fujian ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsChinaEnvironmental scienceResolution (logic)ClimatologyGeologyGeographyComputer scienceArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Forest age is crucial for both carbon cycle modeling and effective forest management. Remote sensing provides crucial data for large-scale forest age mapping, but existing products often suffer from a low spatial resolution (typically 1000 m), making them unsuitable for most forest stands in China, which are generally smaller than this threshold. Recent studies have generated static forest age products for 2019 (CAFA V1.0) (Shang et al., 2023a) and 2020 (Cheng et al., 2024) at a 30 m spatial resolution. However, their low temporal resolution limits their applicability to track multiyear forest carbon changes. This study aims to generate China's annual forest age dataset (CAFA V2.0) at a 30 m resolution from 1986 to 2022, utilizing forest disturbance monitoring and machine learning techniques. Forest disturbance monitoring, which typically has lower uncertainty compared to machine learning approaches, is primarily employed to update annual forest age. The modified COLD (mCOLD) algorithm, which incorporates spatial information and bidirectional monitoring, was used for forest disturbance monitoring. For undisturbed forests, forest age was estimated using machine learning models trained separately for different regions and forest cover types, with inputs including forest height, vegetation indices, climate, terrain, and soil data. Additionally, adjustments were made for underestimations in the Northeastern and Southwestern regions of China identified in CAFA V1.0 using additional reference age samples and region-specific and forest-type-specific models. Validation, using a randomly selected 30 % of two reference datasets, indicated that the mapped age of disturbed forest exhibited a small error of ±2.48 years, while the mapped age of undisturbed forest from 1986 to 2022 had a larger error of ±7.91 years. The generated 30 m annual forest age dataset can facilitate forest carbon cycle modeling in China, offering valuable insights for national forest management practices. The CAFA V2.0 dataset is publicly available at https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.24464170 (Shang et al., 2023b).

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.468
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.003
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations12
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEarth system science dataSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207