the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
GEM-Forest: A Global satellite EMbedding–based map of forests and tree crops for 2020
Abstract. The advent of big data in Earth observation, coupled with recent advances in Artificial Intelligence, has led to the development of geospatial embeddings. These compact, information-rich feature vectors are designed for direct use in machine learning (ML) applications across a wide range of downstream tasks, such as forest monitoring. Motivated by the limitations of existing global forest products and policy requirements like the EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR), we (1) evaluate whether lightweight classifiers applied to satellite embeddings from the Google DeepMind Alpha Earth Foundation (AEF) can accurately map global forest and tree crop extents, and (2) we introduce the resulting GEM-Forest dataset. GEM-Forest is a global satellite embedding–based dataset at 10 m spatial resolution for 2020 that provides a consistent classification across three classes: forest, non-forest, and tree crops. Our comparison of multiple ML approaches ranging from linear models to neural networks showed similar performance across classifiers, while linear models often outperformed more complex models. This consistency indicates that the embeddings encode highly informative and linearly separable structures for global forest discrimination, which includes tree crop separation. Based on these findings, a linear Support Vector Machine was used to generate the final GEM-Forest dataset, which outperformed eight existing global forest, tree cover, or land cover maps on two global validation datasets, while it placed second on the JRC’s global forest validation dataset. Across all three datasets, the forest class achieved omission errors of 12–18% and commission errors of 16–21%, with overall accuracies from 88% to 92%. Misclassifications of tree crops as forests varied between 0.5% and 14.8%, with a producer’s accuracy above 85% for most tree crop datasets, whereas the classification of European tree crops remains the most challenging. Globally, GEM-Forest maps 3,919 million hectares (Mha) of forest for 2020, representing a 5.9% underestimation relative to FAO reports. This variance is partly attributed to the exclusion of unstocked forest areas from our forest definition, discrepancies in country-based forest definitions, and misclassification errors that occurred primarily within open forests and forest–shrubland transition zones. Overall, these results demonstrate that satellite embeddings combined with simple ML approaches support highly accurate, computationally efficient global forest and tree crop mapping. The open-access release of the GEM-Forest dataset and its ML model weights (both available in Paluba et al., 2026; DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18921586) can support international policy decisions and allows direct and straightforward temporal transferability for other years.
- Preprint
(3005 KB) - Metadata XML
- Revised submission
-
Supplement
(41 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
Version 2 | 19 Jun 2026
CC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-1401', Mohamed Bourriz, 08 Jul 2026-
AC2:
'Reply on CC2', Daniel Paluba, 17 Jul 2026
Thank you for this methodological question.
Our extraction of AEF vector values for our training and testing points was conducted within the Google Earth Engine (GEE) environment using the official AEF satellite embedding repository (ee.ImageCollection("GOOGLE/SATELLITE_EMBEDDING/V1/ANNUAL")). In GEE, the dataset is served natively as floating-point values ranging from -1.0 to +1.0, rather than the raw, signed 8-bit integers (int8) used for compressed storage and download distribution. We can therefore confirm that our modelling workflow used the dequantized, analysis-ready floating-point embedding values directly, and no additional value mapping was needed.
We agree that explicitly stating this improves the reproducibility of our study. We will update the 2.2 section of the Data and methods section of the manuscript to explicitly mention that the AEF dataset was accessed via GEE in its native floating-point format to ensure full clarity regarding the numerical scale of these covariates.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-1401-AC2
-
AC2:
'Reply on CC2', Daniel Paluba, 17 Jul 2026
-
Version 1 | 19 Mar 2026
CC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-1401', Vanna Teck, 08 May 2026Dear Authors,
Thank you for sharing this impressive work on global satellite embedding-based forest and tree crop mapping. I found the dataset and methodology very valuable, especially for large-scale applications and regional analysis.
I would like to provide a suggestion regarding the Cambodia region. Based on visual inspection, some areas appear to show potential overestimation of tree crops, particularly where deciduous forests may have been classified as tree crops. This issue seems noticeable in several locations, including:
- Lat: 12.80694, Lon: 107.51690
- Lat: 12.80536, Lon: 106.82905
- Lat: 12.97114, Lon: 105.76146
- Lat: 12.05924, Lon: 104.00265
- Lat: 10.77449, Lon: 103.24736
- Lat: 11.95709, Lon: 103.40392
In Cambodia, deciduous forests and some plantation systems can have similar seasonal spectral characteristics, which may contribute to confusion between natural forests and tree crop classes.
Thank you again for this excellent contribution. I look forward to seeing the future development of this dataset.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-1401-CC1 -
AC1:
'Reply on CC1', Daniel Paluba, 17 Jul 2026
Dear Vanna Teck,
Thank you very much for your kind words regarding our work and for taking the time to provide such detailed, constructive feedback.
We appreciate you sharing these specific coordinate locations for Cambodia. We will investigate them to better understand the cause of the overestimation of the tree crop class in that region. We will use these insights to enhance the dataset in its future iterations.
Thank you again for helping us improve this work!
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-1401-AC1
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
Version 2 | 19 Jun 2026
CC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-1401', Mohamed Bourriz, 08 Jul 2026I have a methodological clarification regarding the use of AlphaEarth Embedding features. Since the AEF embeddings distributed as Cloud-Optimized GeoTIFFs are stored as signed 8-bit integer values, could the authors clarify whether the embeddings were de-quantized before being used in the modelling workflow?
This is particularly important because the raw 8-bit values are not directly equivalent to the analysis-ready embedding values. According to the AEF documentation, the raw integer values should be mapped back to floating-point embedding values using the provided de-quantization transformation.
Clarifying this preprocessing step would improve the reproducibility of the study and help readers better interpret the role and numerical meaning of the AEF covariates in the modelling results.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-1401-CC2 -
AC2:
'Reply on CC2', Daniel Paluba, 17 Jul 2026
Thank you for this methodological question.
Our extraction of AEF vector values for our training and testing points was conducted within the Google Earth Engine (GEE) environment using the official AEF satellite embedding repository (ee.ImageCollection("GOOGLE/SATELLITE_EMBEDDING/V1/ANNUAL")). In GEE, the dataset is served natively as floating-point values ranging from -1.0 to +1.0, rather than the raw, signed 8-bit integers (int8) used for compressed storage and download distribution. We can therefore confirm that our modelling workflow used the dequantized, analysis-ready floating-point embedding values directly, and no additional value mapping was needed.
We agree that explicitly stating this improves the reproducibility of our study. We will update the 2.2 section of the Data and methods section of the manuscript to explicitly mention that the AEF dataset was accessed via GEE in its native floating-point format to ensure full clarity regarding the numerical scale of these covariates.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-1401-AC2
-
AC2:
'Reply on CC2', Daniel Paluba, 17 Jul 2026
-
Version 1 | 19 Mar 2026
CC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-1401', Vanna Teck, 08 May 2026Dear Authors,
Thank you for sharing this impressive work on global satellite embedding-based forest and tree crop mapping. I found the dataset and methodology very valuable, especially for large-scale applications and regional analysis.
I would like to provide a suggestion regarding the Cambodia region. Based on visual inspection, some areas appear to show potential overestimation of tree crops, particularly where deciduous forests may have been classified as tree crops. This issue seems noticeable in several locations, including:
- Lat: 12.80694, Lon: 107.51690
- Lat: 12.80536, Lon: 106.82905
- Lat: 12.97114, Lon: 105.76146
- Lat: 12.05924, Lon: 104.00265
- Lat: 10.77449, Lon: 103.24736
- Lat: 11.95709, Lon: 103.40392
In Cambodia, deciduous forests and some plantation systems can have similar seasonal spectral characteristics, which may contribute to confusion between natural forests and tree crop classes.
Thank you again for this excellent contribution. I look forward to seeing the future development of this dataset.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-1401-CC1 -
AC1:
'Reply on CC1', Daniel Paluba, 17 Jul 2026
Dear Vanna Teck,
Thank you very much for your kind words regarding our work and for taking the time to provide such detailed, constructive feedback.
We appreciate you sharing these specific coordinate locations for Cambodia. We will investigate them to better understand the cause of the overestimation of the tree crop class in that region. We will use these insights to enhance the dataset in its future iterations.
Thank you again for helping us improve this work!
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-1401-AC1
Data sets
GEM-Forest: A Global satellite EMbedding–based map of forests and tree crops for 2020 Daniel Paluba, Valerio Marsocci, Katarína Onačillová Yarin T. Puerta Quintana, Adam Hastie https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18921586
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2,176 | 878 | 65 | 3,119 | 0 | 43 | 62 |
- HTML: 2,176
- PDF: 878
- XML: 65
- Total: 3,119
- Supplement: 0
- BibTeX: 43
- EndNote: 62
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
Daniel Paluba
Valerio Marsocci
Katarína Onačillová
Yarin T. Puerta Quintana
Adam Hastie
- V1, 19 Mar 2026
I have a methodological clarification regarding the use of AlphaEarth Embedding features. Since the AEF embeddings distributed as Cloud-Optimized GeoTIFFs are stored as signed 8-bit integer values, could the authors clarify whether the embeddings were de-quantized before being used in the modelling workflow?
This is particularly important because the raw 8-bit values are not directly equivalent to the analysis-ready embedding values. According to the AEF documentation, the raw integer values should be mapped back to floating-point embedding values using the provided de-quantization transformation.
Clarifying this preprocessing step would improve the reproducibility of the study and help readers better interpret the role and numerical meaning of the AEF covariates in the modelling results.