MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3045792144 · doi:10.3390/f11080827

Unmanned Aerial System and Machine Learning Techniques Help to Detect Dead Woody Components in a Tropical Dry Forest

2020· article· en· W3045792144 on OpenAlexafffund
Carlos Campos-Vargas, Arturo Sánchez‐Azofeifa, Kati Laakso, Philip Marzahn

Bibliographic record

VenueForests · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaInter-American Institute for Global Change ResearchUniversidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia
KeywordsTropical and subtropical dry broadleaf forestsCanopyRandom forestEnvironmental scienceClimate changeWoody plantMultispectral imageRemote sensingForestryAgroforestryComputer scienceMachine learningGeographyEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and Objectives: Increased frequency and intensity of drought events are predicted to occur throughout the world because of climate change. These extreme climate events result in higher tree mortality and fraction of dead woody components, phenomena that are currently being reported worldwide as critical indicators of the impacts of climate change on forest diversity and function. In this paper, we assess the accuracy and processing times of ten machine learning (ML) techniques, applied to multispectral unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) data to detect dead canopy woody components. Materials and Methods: This work was conducted on five secondary dry forest plots located at the Santa Rosa National Park Environmental Monitoring Super Site, Costa Rica. Results: The coverage of dead woody components at the selected secondary dry forest plots was estimated to range from 4.8% to 16.1%, with no differences between the successional stages. Of the ten ML techniques, the support vector machine with radial kernel (SVMR) and random forests (RF) provided the highest accuracies (0.982 vs. 0.98, respectively). Of these two ML algorithms, the processing time of SVMR was longer than the processing time of RF (8735.64 s vs. 989 s). Conclusions: Our results demonstrate that it is feasible to detect and quantify dead woody components, such as dead stands and fallen trees, using a combination of high-resolution UAV data and ML algorithms. Using this technology, accuracy values higher than 95% were achieved. However, it is important to account for a series of factors, such as the optimization of the tuning parameters of the ML algorithms, the environmental conditions and the time of the UAV data acquisition.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.402

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.229
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations11
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueForestsSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207