Lidar-based estimates of aboveground biomass in the continental US and Mexico using ground, airborne, and satellite observations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Existing national forest inventory plots, an airborne lidar scanning (ALS) system, and a space profiling lidar system (ICESat-GLAS) are used to generate circa 2005 estimates of total aboveground dry biomass (AGB) in forest strata, by state, in the continental United States (CONUS) and Mexico. The airborne lidar is used to link ground observations of AGB to space lidar measurements. Two sets of models are generated, the first relating ground estimates of AGB to airborne laser scanning (ALS) measurements and the second set relating ALS estimates of AGB (generated using the first model set) to GLAS measurements. GLAS then, is used as a sampling tool within a hybrid estimation framework to generate stratum-, state-, and national-level AGB estimates. A two-phase variance estimator is employed to quantify GLAS sampling variability and, additively, ALS-GLAS model variability in this current, three-phase (ground-ALS-space lidar) study. The model variance component characterizes the variability of the regression coefficients used to predict ALS-based estimates of biomass as a function of GLAS measurements. Three different types of predictive models are considered in CONUS to determine which produced biomass totals closest to ground-based national forest inventory estimates - (1) linear (LIN), (2) linear-no-intercept (LNI), and (3) log-linear. For CONUS at the national level, the GLAS LNI model estimate (23.95 ± 0.45 Gt AGB), agreed most closely with the US national forest inventory ground estimate, 24.17 ± 0.06 Gt, i.e., within 1%. The national biomass total based on linear ground-ALS and ALS-GLAS models (25.87 ± 0.49 Gt) overestimated the national ground-based estimate by 7.5%. The comparable log-linear model result (63.29 ± 1.36 Gt) overestimated ground results by 261%. All three national biomass GLAS estimates, LIN, LNI, and log-linear, are based on 241,718 pulses collected on 230 orbits. The US national forest inventory (ground) estimates are based on 119,414 ground plots. At the US state level, the average absolute value of the deviation of LNI GLAS estimates from the comparable ground estimate of total biomass was 18.8% (range: Oregon, − 40.8% to North Dakota, 128.6%). Log-linear models produced gross overestimates in the continental US, i.e., > 2.6x, and the use of this model to predict regional biomass using GLAS data in temperate, western hemisphere forests is not appropriate. The best model form, LNI, is used to produce biomass estimates in Mexico. The average biomass density in Mexican forests is 53.10 ± 0.88 t/ha, and the total biomass for the country, given a total forest area of 688,096 km2, is 3.65 ± 0.06 Gt. In Mexico, our GLAS biomass total underestimated a 2005 FAO estimate (4.152 Gt) by 12% and overestimated a 2007/8 radar study's figure (3.06 Gt) by 19%.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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".