Cited by 91Remote Sensing in AgricultureRemote-Sensing Image ClassificationConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management

A machine learning approach to map tropical selective logging

Open access
Hethcoat, M.G., Edwards, D.P., Carreiras, J.M.B., Bryant, R.G., França, F.M., Quegan, S.·2019·Remote Sensing of Environment

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Hundreds of millions of hectares of tropical forest have been selectively logged, either legally or illegally. Methods for detecting and monitoring tropical selective logging using satellite data are at an early stage, with current methods only able to detect more intensive timber harvest (>20 m3 ha−1). The spatial resolution of widely available datasets, like Landsat, have previously been considered too coarse to measure the subtle changes in forests associated with less intensive selective logging, yet most present-day logging is at low intensity. We utilized a detailed selective logging dataset from over 11,000 ha of forest in Rondônia, southern Brazilian Amazon, to develop a Random Forest machine-learning algorithm for detecting low-intensity selective logging (<15 m3 ha−1). We show that Landsat imagery acquired before the cessation of logging activities (i.e. the final cloud-free image of the dry season during logging) was better at detecting selective logging than imagery acquired at the start of the following dry season (i.e. the first cloud-free image of the next dry season). Within our study area the detection rate of logged pixels was approximately 90% (with roughly 20% commission and 8% omission error rates) and approximately 40% of the area inside low-intensity selective logging tracts were labelled as logged. Application of the algorithm to 6152 ha of selectively logged forest at a second site in Pará, northeast Brazilian Amazon, resulted in the detection of 2316 ha (38%) of selective logging (with 20% commission and 7% omission error rates). This suggests that our method can detect low-intensity selective logging across large areas of the Amazon. It is thus an important step forward in developing systems for detecting selective logging pan-tropically with freely available data sets, and has key implications for monitoring logging and implementing carbon-based payments for ecosystem service schemes.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.rse.2018.11.044

Cites

72 of 72 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • ML can be used with remote sensing imagery to pinpoint changes in forest cover, or proxies for deforestation such as smoke from fires set to clear vegetation, as well as to differentiate selective cutting from clearcutting.

    “ML can be used with remote sensing imagery to pinpoint changes in forest cover [241,329,369], or proxies for deforestation such as smoke from fires set to clear vegetation [505], as well as to differentiate selective cutting from clearcutting [342,487].”

    From Tackling climate change with machine learning (2023) · cites this paper as [342]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Storey, J., Scaramuzza, P., Schmidt, G., Barsi, J., 2005. Landsat 7 scan line corrector-off gap-filled product development. In: PECORA 16 Conference Proceedings, pp. 23-27.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hethcoat, M. G., Edwards, D. P., Carreiras, J. M. B., Bryant, R. G., França, F. M., & Quegan, S.
Affiliations
  • Grantham Centre for Sustainable Futures (GB)
  • University of Sheffield (GB)
  • Universidade Federal do Pará (BR)
Corresponding author
Hethcoat, M.G.
Venue
Remote Sensing of Environment
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-02
Volume
221
Pages
569-582
ISSN
0034-4257 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2897077652
Cited by
91
References
72
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 4
FWCI
5.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Remote Sensing of Environment (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion)
  • Explore Bristol Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
  • Lancaster EPrints (Lancaster University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Grantham Centre for Sustainable Futures
  • NERC (PELD-RAS 441659/2016-0)
  • CNPq (NE/P004512/1)
  • CAPES (BEX5528/13-5)
  • CNPq-PELD (403811/2012-0)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Remote Sensing in Agriculture
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Media Technology › Remote-Sensing Image Classification
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Keywords
selective logging, tropical forest monitoring, Landsat imagery, random forest classification, Rondônia, Pará, illegal logging

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review