MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3005415419 · doi:10.3390/make2010003

Canopy Height Estimation at Landsat Resolution Using Convolutional Neural Networks

2020· article· en· W3005415419 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueMachine Learning and Knowledge Extraction · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
FundersUniversity of Regina
KeywordsRandom forestRemote sensingPixelConvolutional neural networkCanopyComputer scienceLidarEnvironmental scienceSatellite imageryGeographyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Forest structure estimation is very important in geological, ecological and environmental studies. It provides the basis for the carbon stock estimation and effective means of sequestration of carbon sources and sinks. Multiple parameters are used to estimate the forest structure like above ground biomass, leaf area index and diameter at breast height. Among all these parameters, vegetation height has unique standing. In addition to forest structure estimation it provides the insight into long term historical changes and the estimates of stand age of the forests as well. There are multiple techniques available to estimate the canopy height. Light detection and ranging (LiDAR) based methods, being the accurate and useful ones, are very expensive to obtain and have no global coverage. There is a need to establish a mechanism to estimate the canopy height using freely available satellite imagery like Landsat images. Multiple studies are available which contribute in this area. The majority use Landsat images with random forest models. Although random forest based models are widely used in remote sensing applications, they lack the ability to utilize the spatial association of neighboring pixels in modeling process. In this research work, we define Convolutional Neural Network based model and analyze that model for three test configurations. We replicate the random forest based setup of Grant et al., which is a similar state-of-the-art study, and compare our results and show that the convolutional neural networks (CNN) based models not only capture the spatial association of neighboring pixels but also outperform the state-of-the-art.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.155
Threshold uncertainty score0.480

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.252 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it