MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7113480367

Remote Sensing of Forest Composition and Diversity: Assessing Spectral Predictors and Long-Term Changes in Quebec’s Forests

2025· other· en· W7113480367 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University) · 2025
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBasal areaBiodiversityTaigaForest structureScale (ratio)Spectral signatureSatellite imageryBalsamForest inventory
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Forest biodiversity and composition are shifting in response to anthropogenic pressures, natural disturbances, and climate change, especially in regions like Quebec where many broadleaf and conifer species coexist. This thesis investigates how remote sensing can support large scale forest monitoring through two research components. The first evaluates the relationship between satellite derived spectral diversity and ground measured tree diversity metrics across Quebec’s deciduous, mixed, and boreal forests. Using Sentinel-2 imagery and forest inventory plots, we tested the Spectral Variation Hypothesis (SVH) through spectral analysis, clustering, and machine learning. While models poorly predicted species richness, Shannon diversity, and functional dispersion (r2 < 0.46 for all), they performed well for percent conifer (r2 = 0.77), suggesting that structural traits are more detectable via optical sensors than taxonomic diversity. The second component tracks changes in conifer composition (through conifer basal area percentage index) across three decades from 1985 to 2021 using forest inventory plots and Cubist regression models trained on Landsat imagery. Ground data showed widespread increases in conifer basal area, particularly in mixed forests largely driven by balsam fir (Abies balsamea). Cubist models generated spatially continuous maps of conifer basal area percentage and captured general trends, though their change detection accuracy at the plot scale was moderate. Together, these studies demonstrate both the strengths and limitations of remote sensing for biodiversity assessment and forest composition monitoring and emphasize the value of focusing on structural characteristics when interpreting spectral signals.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 venueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University)→French-language works237,207→