Development of Automated Analysis Methods for Tornado Damage to Trees in Forests
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The use of forests as a damage indicator for forensic tornado analysis has been underutilized in the past. As such, better utilizing forensic tree damage would aid the assessment of tornado risk in Canada. Previous studies using forests have been performed in an ad hoc manner. There are several emerging methods for analysis of tornado damage in forests involving different approaches including the Box Method in Canada. These approaches still need development to be used systematically with many aspects still rooted in expert judgment or that are performed manually with subjective processing of data.\nThe goal of this work is to create a framework for systematically analyzing tornado damage through forests and to start the process for a fully automated methodology. This includes examining and assessing the different methods used, manually examine tornado tracks with these methods, determine the needs for automated processing of the initial data set, and develop an approach for the Box Method.\nThe current approaches used for forest tornado analysis were examined and compared and the strengths and weaknesses identified. Manual analysis was performed with the Box Method. Issues with how subjective the analysis can be were examined in-depth. The rigourous analysis yielded solutions with how to handle the subjective analysis previously used. Many of the areas that are problematic from an objective standpoint are the edges of the determined tornado path. These aspects include defining where these bounds are, how to handle areas with scattered treefall and irregular patterns of treefall damage. These issues lead to different solutions in identifying the centrelines of the tornado and the width of damage. Using different areas of the damage will lead to different tornado intensities so properly defining or identifying this issue is important.\nUsing the raw imagery, an AI algorithm was used to identify treefall and perform pre-processing of data for further analysis. This included identifying the treefall and treefall direction. A framework for an automated Box Method was proposed with details of the proposed algorithm and the possible areas which will need improvement.\nThis work focuses on the Box Method, with the intention of automating the Box Method. To better examine this method, the analysis was performed manually for the Box Method. For this analysis, tracks were selected to examine, and the treefall was identified. In practice, identification of trees has been performed by estimation, whereas a computer-driven analysis focuses on exact measurements, whether it be individual tree segments or selected areas of treefall. The manual analysis underwent a more thorough examination of the tornado track, while providing insight into how expert opinion related decision points influence the analysis affecting the identified tornado track, the treefall and observed degree of damage. This more rigourous analysis was compared to the operational examination, observing which portions of the analysis may be less well defined for a computer driven analysis, relying on expert opinion to refine and adjust. These comparisons were observed and attempts at creating operational computer-driven alternatives were made.\nWith a computer-driven analysis in mind, an algorithm was trained to determine the initial identified trees (masks) for tornado analysis. This began with the training and identification of treefall throughout forests and the treefall direction. The models were trained based on several training sets. The reliability of these data sets and flaws of the artificial intelligence learning model were identified. Furthermore, a starting model for determining the treefall based on the treefall direction and location was created. These models were developed to their initial stages and will need future development. The current models require more inputs as the issues faced with a fully automated procedure were discovered to be more nuanced and complex.\nWith the raw imagery data, the algorithm for automatically analyzing the Box Method could be considered. From the treefall data, image processing of the treefall is necessary to manipulate the image and observe the pixels in a manner that can be appropriately used in this method. The algorithm was broken down into individual sections to conduct the analysis and the individual portions were used to analyze portions of tornado tracks. With this algorithm, the framework for a fully autonomous Box Method can be performed with refinement.\nThis work started the development of analysis of tornado tracks through forests, addressing some of the initial issues from gathering raw imagery. Different analysis methods were considered and examined and development of a framework for the Box Method that could be utilized by other analysis method was created.
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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 tête enseignante, 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 ».