MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6939122458 · doi:10.60692/wxqmq-y5136

Mapping Annual Global Forest Gain From 1983 to 2021 With Landsat Imagery

2023· article· en· W6939122458 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueGreater South Information System · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Optimization Algorithms Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForest coverLand coverSample (material)Global warmingForest inventorySatellite imageryClimate changeGlobal climate

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The world's forests are experiencing rapid changes due to land-use and climate change. However, a detailed map of global forest gain at fine spatial and temporal resolutions is still missing. To fill this gap, we developed an automatic framework for mapping annual forest gain globally using Landsat time series, the LandTrendr algorithm, and the Google Earth Engine (GEE) platform. First, stable forest samples collected based on the first all-season sample set (FAST) and an automated sample migrate method were used to determine annual Normalized Burn Ratio (NBR) thresholds for forest gain detection. Secondly, with the NBR time-series from 1982 to 2021 and LandTrendr algorithm, we produced dataset of global forest gain year from 1983 to 2021 based on a set of decision rules. Our results reveal that over 60% gains occurred in Russia, Canada, the United States, Indonesia and China, and approximately half of global forest gain occurred between 2001 and 2010. The forest gain map developed in this study exhibited good consistency with statistical inventories and independent regional and global products. Our dataset can be useful for policy-relevant research on the global carbon cycle, and our method provides an efficient and transferable approach for monitoring other types of land cover dynamics.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGreater South Information SystemSame topicAdvanced Optimization Algorithms ResearchFrench-language works237,207