MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1966946865 · doi:10.1080/02827580410019490

Estimation of above ground forest biomass from airborne discrete return laser scanner data using canopy-based quantile estimators

2004· article· en· W1966946865 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueScandinavian Journal of Forest Research · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiomass (ecology)CanopyEnvironmental scienceLaser scanningEstimatorForest inventoryMean squared errorDiameter at breast heightForestryMathematicsGeographyStatisticsForest managementAgroforestryLaserEcologyArchaeologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A conceptual model describing why laser height metrics derived from airborne discrete return laser scanner data are highly correlated with above ground biomass is proposed. Following from this conceptual model, the concept of canopy-based quantile estimators of above ground forest biomass is introduced and applied to an uneven-aged, mature to overmature, tolerant hardwood forest. Results from using the 0th, 25th, 50th, 75th and 100th percentiles of the distributions of laser canopy heights to estimate above ground biomass are reported. A comparison of the five models for each dependent variable group did not reveal any overt differences between models with respect to their predictive capabilities. The coefficient of determination (r 2 ) for each model is greater than 0.80 and any two models may differ at most by up to 9%. Differences in root-mean-square error (RMSE) between models for above ground total, stem wood, stem bark, live branch and foliage biomass were 8.1, 5.1, 2.9, 2.1 and 1.1 Mg ha−1, respectively. Keywords: Above ground forest biomassairborne laser scanningforest structurelaser altimetryLIDARquantile estimatorsremote sensing Acknowledgments The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support of the Centre for Research in Earth and Space Technologies (CRESTech), an Ontario Centre of Excellence, and Geomatics for Informed Decisions (GEOIDE), a Canadian National Centre of Excellence. Mr Lim acknowledges the support from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) of Canada through a PGS-B scholarship and the Ontario Government through an Ontario Graduate Scholarship in Science and Technology. Dr Treitz would also like to acknowledge support of the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) for financial support through research grants. B. Prenzel, C. Sheriff and V. Thomas are thanked for their assistance with data collection. K. Baldwin and I. Morrison from the Great Lakes Forestry Centre, Canadian Forest Service, Natural Resources Canada are thanked for providing data for the Turkey Lakes watershed study area. The authors gratefully acknowledge Optech Inc. and LaserMap Image Plus for their support in acquiring and processing the LIDAR data for the Turkey Lakes watershed. Notes Lim, K. S. and Treitz, P. M. (Department of Geography, Faculty of Arts and Science, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada, K7L 3N6). Estimation of above ground forest biomass from airborne discrete return laser scanner data using canopy-based quantile estimators. Additional informationNotes on contributorsKevin S. Lim Lim, K. S. and Treitz, P. M. (Department of Geography, Faculty of Arts and Science, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada, K7L 3N6). Estimation of above ground forest biomass from airborne discrete return laser scanner data using canopy-based quantile estimators.

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.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.170
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.295 · 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