MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2147013722 · doi:10.1109/whispers.2009.5289085

Progress in retrieving canopy structural parameters and chlorophyll content using the refined hyperspectral and multi-angle measurement concept and CASI data

2009· article· en· W2147013722 on OpenAlexaffabout
A. Simic, Jing M. Chen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing in Agriculture
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHyperspectral imagingRemote sensingNadirLeaf area indexCanopyEnvironmental scienceInversion (geology)Photochemical Reflectance IndexSpectral bandsAtmospheric correctionReflectivityBidirectional reflectance distribution functionComputer scienceGeologyNormalized Difference Vegetation IndexGeographyOpticsSatellitePhysicsBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We attempt to test the refined concept of combining multi-angle and hyperspectral remote sensing proposed by [1] using airborne data. The concept proposes a system that acquires hyperspectral signals only in the nadir direction and measures in two additional directions in two spectral bands, red and NIR. It has been successfully demonstrated that the off-nadir hyperspectral simulations could be closely reconstructed based on the nadir hyperspectral reflectance and off-nadir multi-spectral reflectance in red and NIR bands. This is shown using the Compact Airborne Spectrographic Imager (CASI) data acquired over a forested area in the Sudbury region (Ontario, Canada). Through intensive validation using field data, it is demonstrated that the combination of the hotspot and darkspot reflectances has strong response to changes in vegetation clumping. Furthermore, the model inversion using a LUT approach is employed to retrieve chlorophyll content per unit leaf area. In order to explore the impact of clumping on the chlorophyll content retrieval, we compared the results of the inversion based on leaf area index (LAI) and based on effective LAI (Le). In the comparison with the field-measured data, the determination coefficient increases and RMSE decreases when LAI is considered.

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)0.001
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.172 · 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

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRemote Sensing in Agriculture→French-language works237,207→