Relationships between Satellite-Based Spectral Burned Ratios and Terrestrial Laser Scanning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Three-dimensional point data acquired by Terrestrial Lidar Scanning (TLS) is used as ground observation in comparisons with fire severity indices computed from Landsat satellite multi-temporal images through Google Earth Engine (GEE). Forest fires are measured by the extent and severity of fire. Current methods of assessing fire severity are limited to on-site visual inspection or the use of satellite and aerial images to quantify severity over larger areas. On the ground, assessment of fire severity is influenced by the observers’ knowledge of the local ecosystem and ability to accurately assess several forest structure measurements. The objective of this study is to introduce TLS to validate spectral burned ratios obtained from Landsat images. The spectral change was obtained by an image compositing technique through GEE. The 32 plots were collected using TLS in Wood Buffalo National Park, Canada. TLS-generated 3D points were converted to voxels and the counted voxels were compared in four height strata. There was a negative linear relationship between spectral indices and counted voxels in the height strata between 1 to 5 m to produce R2 value of 0.45 and 0.47 for unburned plots and a non-linear relationship in the height strata between 0 to 0.5m for burned plots to produce R2 value of 0.56 and 0.59. Shrub or stand development was related with the spectral indices at unburned plots, and vegetation recovery in the ground surface was related at burned plots. As TLS systems become more cost efficient and portable, techniques used in this study will be useful to produce objective assessments of structure measurements for fire refugia and ecological response after a fire. TLS is especially useful for the quick ground assessments which are needed for forest fire applications.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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".