MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Mapping tree genera using discrete LiDAR and geometric tree metrics

2012· article· en· W2056438763 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Connie Ko, Tarmo K. Remmel, Gunho Sohn

Bibliographic record

VenueBosque (Valdivia) · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGeographyHumanitiesCartographyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Maps of tree genera are useful in applications including forest inventory, urban planning, and the maintenance of utility transmission line infrastructure. We present a case study of using high density airborne LiDAR data for tree genera mapping along the right of way (ROW) of a utility transmission line corridor. Our goal was to identify single trees that showed or posed potential threats to transmission line infrastructure. Using the three dimensional mapping capability of LiDAR, we derived tree metrics that are related to the geometry of the trees (tree forms). For example, the dominant growth direction of trees is useful in identifying trees that are leaning towards transmission lines. We also derived other geometric indices that are useful in determining tree genera; these metrics included their height, crown shape, size, and branching structures. Our pilot study was situated north of Thessalon, Ontario, Canada along a major utility corridor ROW and surrounding woodlots. The geometric features used for general classification could be categorized into five broad categories related to: 1) lines, 2) clusters, 3) volumes, 4) 3D buffers of points, and 5) overall tree shape that provide parameters as an input for the Random Forest classifier.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0060.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations19
Published2012
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBosque (Valdivia)Same topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207