Étude de l’estimation de paramètres structuraux de la forêt à l’aide d’un cadre de modélisation, de la photographie hémisphérique et du LiDAR.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The availability of experimental data from forest sites is limited and may also have large measurement error. In addition, attributes such as foliage density, are difficult to estimate and validate. To address this problem, we designed a study in five parts: the first part was the development of a modeling framework for three-dimensional simulation of forest scenes, rendered with the freeware POV-Ray (www.povray.org). For this project, 75 simulated stands were created with angular distributions of random leaves, and erectophile and planophile. The framework allows the realization of scenes with the knowledge of architectural attributes of the forest that are sometimes difficult to measure. As a second component, the modeling framework is used to evaluate existing methods for estimating the total plant and leaf area index (PAI, LAI), and canopy closure from hemispherical photography (HP). Ten HPs are simulated per scene and were analyzed to extract the PAI which includes leaves and woody material (eg trunks and branches). The results have shown that the truncated integration Miller (10º to 65º in view zenith), and estimated from 55º to 60º are very similar with coefficient of determination (R[superscript 2])of more than 0.9. The results also show that PAI and LAI are better estimated with respect to the input when the grouping of the leaves is considered. In addition, the grouping method considered with the CLX method (for viewing angles of 55º to 60º), was estimated with an R[superscript 2] of 0.66 and an RMSE of 1.0 units (23 %). Canopy closure estimates near the zenith with 10 HPs were very good with an R[superscript 2] of 0.83 and an RMSE of 9%. As third component, the modeling framework was used to simulate terrestrial and airborne LiDAR data. A new LAI algorithm (LF), based on the CLX method adapted to LiDARs data was presented and tested on these virtual data. The new algorithm has been tested with simulated terrestrial LiDAR (TLS) data for the same 75 virtual scenes. The results show a great potential using TLS data and the best LF method combinations of parameters gave an R[superscript 2] of 0.83 and an RMS error of 0.7 (20 %), thus improving the R[superscript 2] by 0.17 and a reduction of the RMSE of 0.3 units (3 %). The same algorithm was also tested on simulated airborne LiDAR (ALS) data on the same 75 virtual scenes and gave an R[superscript 2] of 0.85 and an RMSE of 0.6 (20 %) at viewing angle of 55° but only an R[superscript 2] of 0.18 and an RMSE of 2.2 (58%) at the viewing angle of 5º. Then, in the fourth part, the new algorithm was tested on ALS and TLS data from the Matane Reserve, Quebec. As the fifth and final installment, we explore in detail the evaluation of the IST methods, and especially the grouping of foliage to better understand the causes and limits of measured errors. The density of foliage within crowns is an important factor in the underestimation of the LAI with the CCL method and the size of the segments with the LX based methods determines the number of segments without holes where the logarithmic mean is a problem. In addition, the difficulty in measuring the LAI at nadir has been demonstrated with ALS, suggesting that the LAI should be estimated at angles near 57.3º for both field data (HP and TLS) and airborne data (ALS).
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».