INDIVIDUAL TREE CROWN DELINEATION USING MULTI-WAVELENGTH TITAN LIDAR DATA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. The inability to detect the Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) at an early stage has led to the enumerable loss of different species of ash trees. Due to the increasing risk being posed by the EAB, a robust and accurate method is needed for identifying Individual Tree Crowns (ITCs) that are at a risk of being infected or are already diseased. This paper attempts to outline an ITC delineation method that employs airborne multi-spectral Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) to accurately delineate tree crowns. The raw LiDAR data were initially pre-processed to generate the Digital Surface Models (DSM) and Digital Elevation Models (DEM) using an iterative progressive TIN (Triangulated Irregular Network) densification method. The DSM and DEM were consequently used for Canopy Height Model (CHM) generation, from which the structural information pertaining to the size and shape of the tree crowns was obtained. The structural information along with the spectral information was used to segment ITCs using a region growing algorithm. The availability of the multi-spectral LiDAR data allows for delineation of crowns that have otherwise homogenous structural characteristics and hence cannot be isolated from the CHM alone. This study exploits the spectral data to derive initial approximations of individual tree tops and consequently grow those regions based on the spectral constraints of the individual trees.
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 | 0.001 | 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 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".