Relationship between canopy height and Landsat ETM+ response in lowland Amazonian rainforest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This letter investigates the influence of within-pixel variation of canopy height on the spectral response recorded in Landsat Enhanced Thematic Mapper (ETM+) data for tropical rainforest. Forest canopy height is derived from airborne, small-footprint LiDAR data acquired using a Leica ALS50 II system. The field site is in the Tambopata National Reserve, in Peruvian Amazonia, where forest types include regenerating, swamp, floodplain and terra firme. For individual Landsat ETM+ bands, the strongest correlation for maximum, mean and standard deviation of canopy height occurred with ETM+ Band 4 (near infrared) for regenerating, floodplain and terra firme forest, and with ETM+ Band 5 (middle infrared) for swamp forest. For normalized difference band indices, ND42 and ND43 (i.e. the Normalized Difference Vegetation Index, NDVI) showed strong correlation with both mean and maximum canopy height for regenerating and terra firme forest, and with maximum and standard deviation of canopy height for floodplain forest. The palm-dominated swamp forest showed weaker relationships, with the strongest occurring for ND45 and ND52 with mean canopy height. Many papers have identified middle-infrared bands as being most sensitive to tropical rainforest structure, although these have often focussed on young regenerative forests. By focussing on older regenerative forest (of >25 years since land abandonment) and mature rainforest types, this work has shown that there is considerable variation with how structure may influence spectral reflectance and lends support to the hypothesis that canopy height distribution and shadowing effects caused by canopy complexity and the presence of emergent trees is what most significantly influences spectral response for tropical rainforests.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".