Forest information from hyperspectral sensing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Remote sensing of forests is a major application for Canada's new hyperspectral satellite (HERO). Hyperspectral remote sensing can provide forest information products for applications in forest inventory, forest chemistry, and for some Kyoto Protocol information products. Through several projects, we have demonstrated that airborne and satellite hyperspectral sensing can provide accurate maps of west coast forest species. High correlations have been demonstrated between ground measurements of foliar nitrogen and estimates derived from hyperspectral sensing. Data for these experiments have included airborne AVIRIS and CASI, and satellite Hyperion data. To achieve operational accuracies of 80% or better for forest species classification, it is essential that the hyperspectral data are well calibrated. Also, sensor artifacts, such as smile, keystone, and striping, must be corrected. Methods have also been developed for mapping forest health status bioindicators: leaf chlorophyll, nitrogen, and water content. Methods have also been developed for determining canopy fractions to levels as low as 20%. If HERO generates a 1% improvement in forest product sales, this would amount to a benefit $700 million annually in Canada alone. This paper will report on the current state of hyperspectral sensing of forests, and present the hyperspectral sensor specifications needed for forest applications.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".