Combining remote sensing, data from earlier inventories, and geostatistical interpolation in multisource forest inventory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multisource forest inventory with two-phase sampling offers several advantages in the forest management planning when compared with the traditional visual inventory by stands. For example, by combining data from remote sensing imagery with field measurements, it is possible to estimate the forest characteristics of large areas at a more reasonable cost than by using the traditional visual inventory by stands. In this study, the k-nearest-neighbours estimation (k-nn), stand inventory data, and geostatistical interpolation were combined for estimation of five forest variables (mean diameter, mean height, mean age, basal area, and volume) per sample plot and stand. Digitized aerial photograph features, visually interpreted aerial photograph features, and updated stand inventory data were used as the auxiliary data sources in the estimation of forest variables. The results show that, at the sample plot level, the k-nn estimates based on the auxiliary data sources were more accurate than the updated stand inventory data transferred to the plot level. At the stand level, the updated stand inventory data were more accurate than the k-nn estimates. When the k-nn estimates were combined with the updated stand inventory data, the accuracy of the estimates was significantly improved at both the sample plot and stand level. The geostatistical interpolation, which was tested on the stand level estimation, did not result in any further improvement in the accuracy of the estimates.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".