LiDAR-supported estimation of change in forest biomass with time-invariant regression models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A single a priori chosen linear regression model with two alternative error structures is proposed for model-assisted (MA) and model-dependent (MD) estimation of state and change in aboveground tree biomass (AGB, Mg·ha −1 ) in three forest strata in the Våler forest in southeastern Norway. Field data of tree height and stem diameter were collected in 145 permanent 200 m 2 circular plots. Concurrent LiDAR data were collected for the entire forest. The regression model includes two LiDAR-based explanatory variables: the mean of canopy height raised to a power of 1.5 and the standard deviation of canopy heights. A nearest-neighbour thinning of the 2010 LiDAR data to the density of the 1999 data was implemented to counter density effects in the explanatory variables. Estimates of change based on a single regression model were more accurate than estimating change from year-specific models (and no data thinning). A canopy height dependent correlated error structure was preferred over a partitioning of the error to temporary and “permanent” plot effects. For point estimates of AGB in 1999 and 2010, MA and MD estimates of errors were numerically comparable, but MD errors of change were much smaller than corresponding MA errors.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".