Integrating forest inventory data and MODIS data to map species-level biomass in Chinese boreal forests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Timely and accurate knowledge of species-level biomass is essential for forest managers to sustain forest resources and respond to various forest disturbance regimes. In this study, maps of species-level biomass in Chinese boreal forests were generated by integrating Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) images with forest inventory data using k nearest neighbor (kNN) methods and evaluated at different scales. The performance of 630 kNN models based on different distance metrics, k values, and temporal MODIS predictor variables were compared. Random Forest (RF) showed the best performance among the six distance metrics: RF, Euclidean distance, Mahalanobis distance, most similar neighbor in canonical correlation space, most similar neighbor computed using projection pursuit, and gradient nearest neighbor. No appreciable improvement was observed using multi-month MODIS data compared with using single-month MODIS data. At the pixel scale, species-level biomass for larch and white birch had relatively good accuracy (root mean square deviation < 62.1%), while the other species had poorer accuracy. The accuracy of most species except for willow and spruce was improved up to the ecoregion scale. The maps of species-level biomass captured the effects of disturbances including fire and harvest and can provide useful information for broad-scale forest monitoring over time.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".