POTENTIAL OF UAV BASED CONVERGENT PHOTOGRAMMETRY IN MONITORING REGENERATION STANDARDS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Several thousand hectares of forest blocks are regenerating after harvest in Canada. Monitoring their performance over different stages of growth is critical in ensuring future productivity and ecological balance. Tools for rapid evaluation can support timely and reliable planning of interventions. Conventional ground surveys or visual image assessments are either time intensive or inaccurate, while alternate operational remote sensing tools are unavailable. In this study, we test the feasibility and strength of UAV-based photogrammetry with an EO camera on a UAV platform in assessing regeneration performance. Specifically we evaluated stocking, spatial density and height distribution of naturally growing (irregularly spaced stems) or planted (regularly spaced stems) conifer regeneration in different phases of growth. Standard photogrammetric workflow was applied on the 785 acquired images for 3D reconstruction of the study sites. The required parameters were derived based on automated single stem detection algorithm developed in-house. Comparing with field survey data, preliminary results hold promise. Future studies are planned to expand the scope to larger areas and different stand conditions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".