Multisensor and Multispectral LiDAR Characterization and Classification of a Forest Environment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Airborne LiDAR is increasingly used in forest carbon, ecosystem, and resource monitoring. For practical design and manufacture reasons, the 1064 nm near-infrared (NIR) wavelength has been the most commonly adopted, and most literature in this field represents sampling characteristics in this wavelength. However, due to eye-safety and application-specific needs, other common wavelengths are 1550 nm and 532 nm. All provide canopy structure reconstructions that can be integrated or compared through space and time but the consistency or complementarity of 3D airborne LiDAR data sampled at multiple wavelengths is poorly understood. Here, we report on multispectral LiDAR missions carried out in 2013 and 2015 over a managed forest research site. The 1st used 3 independent sensors, and the 2nd used a single sensor carrying 3 lasers. The experiment revealed differences in proportions of returns at ground level, vertical foliage distributions, and gap probability across wavelengths. Canopy attenuation was greatest at 532 nm, presumably due to leaf tissue absorption. Relative to 1064 nm, foliage was undersampled at midheight percentiles at 1550 nm and 532 nm. Multisensor data demonstrated differences in foliage characterization due to combined influences of wavelength and acquisition configuration. Single-sensor multispectral data were more stable but demonstrated clear wavelength-dependent variation that could be exploited in intensity-based land cover classification without the aid of 3D derivatives. This work sets the stage for improvements in land surface classification and vertical foliage partitioning through the integration of active spectral and structural laser return information.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".