MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041281368 · doi:10.3390/rs4061741

Individual Urban Tree Species Classification Using Very High Spatial Resolution Airborne Multi-Spectral Imagery Using Longitudinal Profiles

2012· article· en· W2041281368 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Kongwen Zhang, Baoxin Hu

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing in Agriculture
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTree (set theory)Remote sensingDecision treeIdentification (biology)Environmental scienceComputer scienceForest inventoryGeographyForestryEcologyForest managementArtificial intelligenceMathematicsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Individual tree species identification is important for urban forest inventory and ecology management. Recent advances in remote sensing technologies facilitate more detailed estimation of individual urban tree characteristics. This study presents an approach to improve the classification of individual tree species via longitudinal profiles from very high spatial resolution airborne imagery. The longitudinal profiles represent the side view tree shape, which play a very important role in individual tree species on-site identification. Decision tree classification was employed to conduct the final classification result. Using this profile approach, six major species (Maple, Ash, Birch, Oak, Spruce, Pine) of trees on the York University (Ontario, Canada) campus were successfully identified. Two decision trees were constructed, one knowledge-based and one derived from gain ratio criteria. The classification accuracy achieved were 84% and 86%, respectively.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 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

Citations86
Published2012
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicRemote Sensing in AgricultureFrench-language works237,207