MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055239819 · doi:10.5558/tfc79313-2

Distinguishing foliage from branches in the non-destructive measurement of the three-dimensional structure of mountain forest canopies

2003· article· en· W2055239819 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Takafumi Tanaka, Park Hotaek, Shigeaki Hattori

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Forestry Chronicle · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceJapan Science and Technology Corporation
KeywordsCanopyRemote sensingRange (aeronautics)Tree canopyReflection (computer programming)Environmental scienceRadiative transferLaserAtmospheric sciencesOpticsGeologyEcologyPhysicsMaterials scienceBiologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mountainous forest canopies usually present a slanted, rough and porous surface. To clarify the effect of forest on radiative and convective exchanges, the three-dimensional structure of the canopy should be measured. An earlier study examined the laser plane range-finding method as a new non-destructive way to measure it. In this study, to distinguish foliage from branches using the results of measurements, detected values of reflection were adjusted to compensate for varying distances from the detector to canopy elements. When the laser reflection values were adjusted by using the 1.5-th power of the distance, the calculations could distinguish foliage from stems. Key words: Mountainous forest, canopy, non-destructive, three-dimensional structure, laser, range-finding method, NDVI, CCD camera

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Forestry ChronicleSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207