THE EARLY DETECTION OF THE EMERALD ASH BORER (EAB) USING MULTI-SOURCE REMOTELY SENSED DATA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. The objectives of this study were to exploit the synergy of hyperspectral imagery, Light Detection And Ranging (LiDAR) and high spatial resolution data and their synergy in the early detection of the EAB (Emerald Ash Borer) presence in trees within urban areas and to develop a framework to combine information extracted from multiple data sources. To achieve these, an object-oriented framework was developed to combine information derived from available data sets to characterize ash trees. Within this framework, an advanced individual tree delineation method was developed to delineate individual trees using the combined high-spatial resolution worldview-3 imagery was used together with LiDAR data. Individual trees were then classified to ash and non-ash trees using spectral and spatial information. In order to characterize the health state of individual ash trees, leaves from ash trees with various health states were sampled and measured using a field spectrometer. Based on the field measurements, the best indices that sensitive to leaf chlorophyll content were selected. The developed framework and methods were tested using worldview-3, airborne LiDAR data over the Keele campus of York University Toronto Canada. Satisfactory results in terms of individual tree crown delineation, ash tree identification and characterization of the health state of individual ash trees. Quantitative evaluations is being carried out.
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 | 0.002 | 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".