MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3031572497 · doi:10.1109/jstars.2020.2995577

Estimating Effective Leaf Area Index of Winter Wheat Using Simulated Observation on Unmanned Aerial Vehicle-Based Point Cloud Data

2020· article· en· W3031572497 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Yang Song, Jinfei Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing in Agriculture
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Space Agency
KeywordsRemote sensingPoint cloudLeaf area indexImage resolutionMean squared errorSatelliteComputer scienceRGB color modelEnvironmental scienceField (mathematics)Artificial intelligenceMathematicsGeographyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Within-field variation of leaf area index (LAI) plays an essential role in field crop monitoring and yield forecasting. Although unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV)-based optical remote sensing method can overcome the spatial and temporal resolution limitations associated with satellite imagery for fine-scale within-field LAI estimation of field crops, image correction and calibration of UAV data are very challenging. In this study, a physical-based method was proposed to automatically calculate crop effective LAI (LAIe) using UAV-based 3-D point cloud data. Regular high spatial resolution RGB images were used to generate point cloud data for the study area. The proposed method, simulated observation of point cloud (SOPC), was designed to obtain the 3-D spatial distribution of vegetation and bare ground points and calculate the gap fraction and LAIe from a UAV-based 3-D point cloud dataset at vertical, 57.5°, and multiview angle of a winter wheat field in London, Ontario, Canada. Results revealed that the derived LAIe using the SOPC multiview angle method correlates well with the LAIe derived from ground digital hemispherical photography, R <sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">2</sup> = 0.76. The root mean square error and mean absolute error for the entire experiment period from May 11 to May 27 were 0.19 and 0.14, respectively. The newly proposed method performs well for LAIe estimation during the main leaf development stages (BBCH 20-39) of the growth cycle. This method has the potential to become an alternative approach for crop LAIe estimation without the need for ground-based reference measurements, hence save time and money.

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 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 score0.230
Threshold uncertainty score0.767

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote SensingSame topicRemote Sensing in AgricultureFrench-language works237,207