MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7116910478 · doi:10.14358/pers.24-00124r3

Detecting Altimetric Changes in Arctic Landscapes Using Historical Aerial Imagery-Derived Digital Elevation Models (hDEMs): Case Study of the Black Mountain Alluvial Fan Complex, Canada

2025· article· en· W7116910478 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
E. C. Menio, Hank Theiss, Jackson David Cothren

Bibliographic record

VenuePhotogrammetric Engineering & Remote Sensing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicClimate change and permafrost
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDigital elevation modelElevation (ballistics)Alluvial fanAerial photosAerial imagerySatellite imageryClimate changeArctic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the rapidly changing Arctic, reconstructing landscapes over the last 50 years is essential to understanding effects due to climate-induced geomorphic change. While region-wide warming became measurable in the 1980s, spatially extensive high-latitude elevation data sets extend temporally back to the 2000s. Historical aerial imagery archives provide data sets of high-resolution imagery from the mid-to late 1900s with stereo-capability that can be harnessed to create historical digital elevation models (hDEMs). Reconstructing a surface from the past is challenging due to a lack of ground control from that era to constrain it in space, especially at high latitudes. The main purpose of this study was to determine whether an hDEM could be used to detect altimetric change in an area of poor ground control. We developed an hDEM from historical aerial imagery over the Black Mountain alluvial fan complex in the Northwest Territories, Canada, and used satellite imagery-derived ground control points to constrain the model in space. The resulting hDEM, when compared with the ArcticDEM, yields a vertical root mean square error of 5.19 m. We were able to isolate approximately 30 to 40 m of altimetric change from a landslide (circa 2013 to 2016) in the Black Mountain Fan catchment, supporting the supervised use of hDEMs for change detection studies. Data produced from this study are available on Dryad (doi:10.5061/dryad.mw6m90691).

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)0.001
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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.192 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhotogrammetric Engineering & Remote SensingSame topicClimate change and permafrostFrench-language works237,207