MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1966539885 · doi:10.5589/m07-026

Physically based inversion modeling for unsupervised cluster labeling, independent forest classification, and LAI estimation using MFM-5-Scale

2007· article· en· W1966539885 on OpenAlexfundvenueaboutno aff
Derek R. Peddle, Ryan Johnson, J. Cihlar, Sylvain G. Leblanc, Jing M Chen, Forrest G. Hall

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Remote Sensing · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing in Agriculture
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersWestern Canada Research Grid
KeywordsLand coverRemote sensingScale (ratio)Thematic MapperGeographyCluster analysisLeaf area indexComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceSatellite imageryCartographyLand useArtificial intelligenceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unsupervised clustering is important for regional- to national-scale forest inventories where supervised training data are impractical or unavailable. However, labeling clusters in terms of land-cover classes can be labour intensive and problematic, and clustering and related methods do not provide biophysical-structural information (BSI). Canopy reflectance models such as 5-Scale are powerful forest remote sensing tools; however, 5-Scale can only be run in forward mode and is not invertible to obtain the required forest information. This problem was solved using multiple-forward-mode (MFM) coupled with 5-Scale to enable MFM-5-Scale inversion of land cover and BSI using a look-up table (MFM-LUT) approach that matches satellite image reflectance values with modeled reflectance values that have associated land cover and BSI, such as density, leaf area index (LAI), and crown dimensions, as well as subpixel-scale component fractions. MFM requires no training data or a priori BSI and can optionally be stratified (generalized) by species, structural, hierarchical, mixed forest, and other class definitions. In this paper, MFM-5-Scale was used with Landsat thematic mapper (TM) imagery at the Boreal Ecosystem-Atmosphere Study (BOREAS) southern study area (SSA) modeling subarea (MSA) in Saskatchewan, Canada. MFM-5-Scale was used to label unsupervised cluster sets (n = 17 and 97) from a previous land-cover classification by progressive generalization (CPG), with the best results obtained from independent, stand-alone MFM classification (87%, 76%, and 71% for the three hierarchies of 16 forest type, species, and density classes) validated against the provincial (SERM) forest inventory map and also compared with a standard maximum likelihood (ML) classification. Further, MFM-5-Scale estimated LAI at 24 BOREAS plots within ±0.57 LAI compared with ground-based tracing radiation and architecture of canopies (TRAC) LAI validation data. BSI is not provided by CPG clustering or ML. Based on this and other studies, we conclude that MFM provides an inversion modeling context for sophisticated forest radiative transfer models to retrieve a higher level of land cover and BSI, with detailed LUTs providing a rich set of forest information suitable for query, analysis, and follow-on simulation studies. These methods can augment existing regional- to national-scale remote sensing based inventories by providing a robust cluster labeling and BSI capability or can provide stand-alone capabilities over a variety of applications and scales.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.088

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations25
Published2007
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Remote SensingSame topicRemote Sensing in AgricultureFrench-language works237,207