A comparison of NDVI and MTVI2 for estimating LAI using CHRIS imagery: a case study in wheat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Leaf area index (LAI) is a key variable in crop growth models. The derivation of reliable LAI maps from satellite imagery would provide a means of spatially extrapolating these models. During the 2004 and 2005 growing seasons, hyperspectral data from the Compact High Resolution Imaging Spectrometer (CHRIS) sensor were acquired over a wheat crop in southern Alberta. The ability to obtain reliable LAI estimates from CHRIS data was investigated using a preexisting relationship between LAI and the modified transformed vegetation index (MTVI2). The performance of the recently develop MTVI2 in estimating LAI was compared to that of the more commonly used normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI). Both narrow and broad bands simulated from the CHRIS data were used in calculating the NDVI. All vegetation indices provided good relationships with LAI (R2 = 0.70–0.90). The errors in the estimated LAI values varied with vegetation index and were dependent on growth stage. The MTVI2 performed better than the NDVI at full canopy closure. Confirming previous reports in the literature, the NDVI tended to saturate at LAI values of 37–4, which resulted in an underestimation of LAI at full canopy closure. There was no benefit to using narrow spectral bands in the NDVI. Estimation of LAI using the MTVI2 was underestimated late in the season during the seed-filling period.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".