MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7077852353 · doi:10.71892/11143/914

Identification d’aires mellifères productives par une méthode d’analyse d’images satellitaires et technique d’intelligence artificielle

2025· other· fr· W7077852353 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2025
Typeother
Languagefr
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsViewshed analysisTropical rain forestProduction system (computer science)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The global decline in honeybee (Apis mellifera) populations, driven by climate change and habitat degradation, poses significant problems as these insects are crucial for producing honey, wax, and other products. Honeybees also play a vital role in pollination, supporting biodiversity, increasing agricultural yields, and contributing to the economy. For instance, in 2021, the value of honeybee pollination in Canada was estimated at over 3 billion CAD, highlighting their importance to the agricultural sector and the broader economy. Nonetheless, the survival of honeybees is increasingly jeopardized by factors such as climate change, habitat loss due to the expansion of farmland, and pesticide exposure. A promising strategy for proposing solutions to this in honeybee populations decline is to identify areas where these stress factors are mitigated, using beekeeping potential map. These maps allow for the identification the areas that are best for beekeeping, where the productivity can be maximized, different risks can be reduced. Such maps can assist beekeepers and government agencies in making informed decisions about where to establish apiaries, ultimately contributing to the protection and support of honeybee populations. Implementing these tools is challenging due to the need for integrating diverse factors that vary across spatial and temporal scales, necessitating mathematical modeling techniques. These models must seamlessly account for the complex interplay of these factors within a unified framework. In this study, we use fuzzy inference systems under two paradigms: expert knowledge and data mining modeling, to assess beekeeping potential. Initially, a Mamdani-type fuzzy inference system was developed, integrating expert knowledge with multi-source geospatial data in a hierarchical manner. This hierarchical model was applied in an area located in southern Quebec, demonstrating both reliability and effectiveness. Building upon this hierarchical fuzzy model, we proposed a rules simplification framework that permitted us to improve his interpretability. The results of the simplified model show a significant improvement in interpretability, reducing the number of rules from forty-three to six and variables from thirteen to five. This simplification process enhanced the model's predictive capability, improving the mean squared error by 30% compared to the original flat fuzzy system. In the following model, we introduce an innovative approach for predicting beekeeping potential areas by employing an adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system with subtractive clustering. The study incorporates weather variables and land cover quality as key factors to assess the suitability of an area, using hive mass as a proxy. This approach demonstrated strong predictive capabilities, achieving a high correlation (R = 0.87) during the testing phase. Based on the analysis of these three models, it emerges that the land cover quality variable plays the most significant role in determining the beekeeping suitability of an area. In the final step of our research work, we utilized very high-spatial-resolution satellite images to estimate the floral diversity and abundance of beekeeping plants in fallow and grazing areas. A spectral unmixing algorithm was applied to multispectral very high-spatial-resolution images (Neo-Pleiade, WorldView-3, Planet SuperDove) to identify bee plants (verge d’or scientific name Solidago canadensis and eupatoire maculée scientific name Eutrochium maculatum). These plants were observed in the field near Deschambault, Quebec, around the time of the satellite’s pass. While not all sensors yielded conclusive results, the spectral unmixing technique, when applied with very high-spatial-resolution satellite images, demonstrated promising potential under suitable conditions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MIND→Same topicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping→French-language works237,207→