MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1930492459 · doi:10.1139/x2012-019

Evaluation of nonlinear equations for predicting diameter from tree height

2012· article· en· W1930492459 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Huiquan Bi, Julian C. Fox, Yun Li, Yuancai Lei, Yong Pang

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiameter at breast heightMathematicsTree (set theory)StatisticsExponential functionInverseFunction (biology)Range (aeronautics)Weibull distributionMathematical analysisGeometryEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the emergence and advancement of airborne laser scanning technology over the past decade, individual tree height can be easily measured over a large area of forests with a comparable degree of accuracy to conventional ground-based methods. In laser scanning based large-scale forest inventories, the need to predict diameter from remotely sensed tree height calls for a systematic evaluation of equation forms as the first step towards a well-developed approach to developing diameter–height equations. This study evaluated more than 30 height–diameter equations in the forest biometrics literature to select candidates for deriving equation forms for diameter–height equations. The evaluation was based on four criteria: (i) the height–diameter function is inversable; (ii) the inverse function is continuous and monotonically increasing over a specified working range of total tree height; (iii) diameter at breast height is equal to zero when tree height equals breast height in the inverse function; and preferably, (iv) the inverse function has an inflection point that is consistent with biological expectations. A total of 12 candidate equation forms were derived, which included five two-parameter and seven three-parameter equations. The estimation properties and predictive performance of these 12 equation forms were further evaluated and compared through repeated sampling and fitting using data from 3581 trees destructively sampled for taper measurements from Pinus radiata D. Don plantations across New South Wales, Australia. Three equation forms, including the constrained Richards, Weibull, and the combined power and exponential function, displayed superior prediction accuracy and estimation properties and so were recommended as the primary equation forms for developing diameter–height equations. The remaining equation forms were marred by either lower prediction accuracy or poorer estimation properties or both. The three recommended equation forms should only serve as basic deterministic specifications upon which other tree and stand variables should be incorporated as predictors to further improve their predictive performance.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.316
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.247 · 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.

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

Citations48
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicForest ecology and managementFrench-language works237,207