MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1930004075 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2014-0297

Using semi-global matching point clouds to estimate growing stock at the plot and stand levels: application for a broadleaf-dominated forest in central Europe

2014· article· en· W1930004075 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Christoph Stepper, Christoph Straub, Hans Pretzsch

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForest inventoryPoint cloudCanopyMathematicsLaser scanningStatisticsEnvironmental scienceRandom forestRemote sensingForestryGeographyComputer scienceForest managementLaserPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dense image-based point clouds have great potential to accurately assess forest attributes such as growing stock. The objective of this study was to combine height and spectral information obtained from UltraCamXp stereo images to model the growing stock in a highly structured broadleaf-dominated forest (77.5 km 2 ) in southern Germany. We used semi-global matching (SGM) to generate a dense point cloud and subtracted elevation values obtained from airborne laser scanner (ALS) data to compute canopy height. Sixty-seven explanatory variables were derived from the point cloud and an orthoimage for use in the model. Two different approaches — the linear regression model (lm) and the random forests model (rf) — were tested. We investigated the impact that varying amounts of training data had on model performance. Plot data from a previously acquired set of 1875 inventory plots was systematically eliminated to form three progressively less dense subsets of 937, 461, and 226 inventory plots. Model evaluation at the plot level (size: 500 m 2 ) yielded relative root mean squared errors (RMSEs) ranging from 31.27% to 35.61% for lm and from 30.92% to 36.02% for rf. At the stand level (mean stand size: 32 ha), RMSEs from 14.76% to 15.73% for lm and from 13.87% to 14.99% for rf were achieved. Therefore, similar results were obtained from both modeling approaches. The reduction in the number of inventory plots did not considerably affect the precision. Our findings underline the potential for aerial stereo imagery in combination with ALS-based terrain heights to support forest inventory and management.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.282
Threshold uncertainty score0.985

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.294 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations54
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207