Penalized regression techniques for prediction: a case study for predicting tree mortality using remotely sensed vegetation indicesThis article is one of a selection of papers from Extending Forest Inventory and Monitoring over Space and Time.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Constructing models can be complicated when the available fitting data are highly correlated and of high dimension. However, the complications depend on whether the goal is prediction instead of estimation. We focus on predicting tree mortality (measured as the number of dead trees) from change metrics derived from moderate-resolution imaging spectroradiometer satellite images. The high dimensionality and multicollinearity inherent in such data are of particular concern. Standard regression techniques perform poorly for such data, so we examine shrinkage regression techniques such as ridge regression, the LASSO, and partial least squares, which yield more robust predictions. We also suggest efficient strategies that can be used to select optimal models such as 0.632+ bootstrap and generalized cross validation. The techniques are compared using simulations. The techniques are then used to predict insect-induced tree mortality severity for a Pinus radiata D. Don plantation in southern New South Wales, Australia, and their prediction performances are compared. We find that shrinkage regression techniques outperform the standard methods, with ridge regression and the LASSO performing particularly well.
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 | 0.009 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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".