The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Influence of Multi-Source and Multi-Temporal Remotely Sensed and Ancillary Data on the Accuracy of Random Forest Classification of Wetlands in Northern Minnesota
Open accessAbstract
Wetland mapping at the landscape scale using remotely sensed data requires both affordable data and an efficient accurate classification method. Random forest classification offers several advantages over traditional land cover classification techniques, including a bootstrapping technique to generate robust estimations of outliers in the training data, as well as the capability of measuring classification confidence. Though the random forest classifier can generate complex decision trees with a multitude of input data and still not run a high risk of over fitting, there is a great need to reduce computational and operational costs by including only key input data sets without sacrificing a significant level of accuracy. Our main questions for this study site in Northern Minnesota were: (1) how does classification accuracy and confidence of mapping wetlands compare using different remote sensing platforms and sets of input data; (2) what are the key input variables for accurate differentiation of upland, water, and wetlands, including wetland type; and (3) which datasets and seasonal imagery yield the best accuracy for wetland classification. Our results show the key input variables include terrain (elevation and curvature) and soils descriptors (hydric), along with an assortment of remotely sensed data collected in the spring (satellite visible, near infrared, and thermal bands; satellite normalized vegetation index and Tasseled Cap greenness and wetness; and horizontal-horizontal (HH) and horizontal-vertical (HV) polarization using L-band satellite radar). We undertook this exploratory analysis to inform decisions by natural resource managers charged with monitoring wetland ecosystems and to aid in designing a system for consistent operational mapping of wetlands across landscapes similar to those found in Northern Minnesota.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States
Cowardin, L. M., Service, U. S. F. A. W., & (U.S.), B. S. P. (1979) · doi:10.5962/bhl.title.4108 · Cited by 2,153
STEININGER, M. K. (1996) · International Journal of Remote Sensing · doi:10.1080/01431169608948984 · Cited by 176
Cited by
The Challenges of Remote Monitoring of Wetlands
Gallant, A. (2015) · Remote Sensing · doi:10.3390/rs70810938 · Cited by 297
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Corcoran, J., Knight, J., & Gallant, A.
- Venue
- Remote Sensing
- Publisher
- MDPI AG
- Published
- 2013-07-04
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 3212-3238
- ISSN
- 2072-4292 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2138499468
- Cited by
- 217
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 26.55
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Influence of Multi-Source and Multi-Temporal Remotely Sensed and Ancillary Data on the Accuracy of Random Forest Classification of Wetlands in Northern Minnesota. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3390/rs5073212
- The paper
- Corcoran, J., Knight, J., & Gallant, A. (2013). Influence of Multi-Source and Multi-Temporal Remotely Sensed and Ancillary Data on the Accuracy of Random Forest Classification of Wetlands in Northern Minnesota. Remote Sensing. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs5073212
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.