MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416337428 · doi:10.5194/bg-23-2959-2026

PeatDepth-ML: A Global Map of Peat Depth Predicted using Machine Learning

2025· article· en· W4416337428 on OpenAlexaff
Jade Skye, Joe R. Melton, Colin Goldblatt, Angela Gallego‐Sala, Michelle Garneau, R. Scott Winton

Bibliographic record

VenueBiogeosciences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalUniversity of VictoriaEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeatBootstrapping (finance)Metric (unit)Climate changeSampling (signal processing)Mean squared errorTraining (meteorology)Global change

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Peatlands are major carbon stores that are sensitive to climate change and increasingly affected by human activity. Accurate assessment of carbon stocks and modelling of peatland responses to future climate scenarios requires robust information on peat depth. We developed PeatDepth-ML, a machine learning framework that predicts global peat depths using a comprehensive database of peat depth measurements for training and validation. Building on an existing framework for mapping peatland extent, we incorporated new environmental datasets relevant to peat formation, revised cross-validation procedures, and introduced a custom scoring metric to improve predictions of deep peat deposits. To evaluate model sensitivity to sampling bias inherent in the training data, we applied a bootstrapping approach. Model performance, assessed using a blocked leave-one-out approach, yielded a root mean square error of 70.1 ± 0.9 cm and a mean bias error of 2.1 ± 0.7 cm, performing as well as or better than previously published models. The global map produced by PeatDepth-ML predicts a median peat depth of 134 cm (IQR: 87–187) over areas with more than 30 cm of peat. Like other regression-based models, PeatDepth-ML tended to predict toward mean training depths. An area of applicability analysis suggests the model has good applicability globally with the exception of some coastal and several mountainous regions like the Andes and the highlands of Borneo and New Guinea. Predictor selection was highly sensitive to training data subsets that arose from the bootstrapping approach, occasionally resulting in regional variations in accuracy. The bootstrapping approach and our area of applicability analysis thus clearly demonstrates the prime importance of quality training data in data-driven approaches like PeatDepth-ML. Using our predicted peat depth map, together with peatland extent and literature-derived estimates of bulk density and organic carbon content, we estimate global peat carbon stocks at 327–373 Pg C, consistent with previous global estimates.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.241 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiogeosciencesSame topicPeatlands and Wetlands EcologyFrench-language works237,207