Combining Multi-Date Airborne Laser Scanning and Digital Aerial Photogrammetric Data for Forest Growth and Yield Modelling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The increasing availability of highly detailed three-dimensional remotely-sensed data depicting forests, including airborne laser scanning (ALS) and digital aerial photogrammetric (DAP) approaches, provides a means for improving stand dynamics information. The availability of data from ALS and DAP has stimulated attempts to link these datasets with conventional forestry growth and yield models. In this study, we demonstrated an approach whereby two three-dimensional point cloud datasets (one from ALS and one from DAP), acquired over the same forest stands, at two points in time (circa 2008 and 2015), were used to derive forest inventory information. The area-based approach (ABA) was used to predict top height (H), basal area (BA), total volume (V), and stem density (N) for Time 1 and Time 2 (T1, T2). We assigned individual yield curves to 20 × 20 m grid cells for two scenarios. The first scenario used T1 estimates only (approach 1, single date), while the second scenario combined T1 and T2 estimates (approach 2, multi-date). Yield curves were matched by comparing the predicted cell-level attributes with a yield curve template database generated using an existing growth simulator. Results indicated that the yield curves using the multi-date data of approach 2 were matched with slightly higher accuracy; however, projections derived using approach 1 and 2 were not significantly different. The accuracy of curve matching was dependent on the ABA prediction error. The relative root mean squared error of curve matching in approach 2 for H, BA, V, and N, was 18.4, 11.5, 25.6, and 27.53% for observed (plot) data, and 13.2, 44.6, 50.4 and 112.3% for predicted data, respectively. The approach presented in this study provides additional detail on sub-stand level growth projections that enhances the information available to inform long-term, sustainable forest planning and management.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".