Effects of radiometric correction on cover type and spatial resolution for modeling plot level forest attributes using multispectral airborne LiDAR data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In order to use the airborne LiDAR intensity in conjunction with the height-derived information for forest modeling and classification purposes, radiometric correction is deemed to be a critical pre-processing requirement. In this study, we implemented a LiDAR scan line correction (LSLC) and an overlap-driven intensity correction (OIC) to remove the stripe artifacts that appeared within the individual flight lines and overlapping regions of adjacent flight lines of a multispectral LiDAR dataset. We tested the effectiveness of these corrections in various land/forest cover types in a temperate mixed mature forest in Ontario, Canada. Subsequently, we predicted three plot level forest attributes, i.e., basal area (BA), quadratic mean diameter (QMD), and trees per hectare (TPH), using different combinations of height and intensity metrics derived from the multispectral LiDAR data to determine if LiDAR intensity data (corrected and uncorrected) improved predictions over models that utilize LiDAR height-derived information only. The results show that LSLC can reduce the intensity banding effect by 0.19–23.06% in channel 1 (1550 nm) and 4.79–66.87% in channel 2 (1064 nm) at the close-to-nadir region. The combined effect of LSLC and OIC is notable particularly at the swath edges. After implementing both methods, the intensity homogeneity is improved by 5.51–12% in channel 1, 6.37–42.93% in channel 2, and 6.48–33.77% in channel 3 (532 nm). Our results further demonstrate that BA and QMD predictions in our study area gained little from additional LiDAR intensity metrics. Intensity metrics from multiple LiDAR channels and intensity normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) metrics did improve TPH predictions up to 7.2% in RMSE and 1.8% in Bias. However, our lowest TPH prediction errors (%RMSE) were still approximately 10% larger than for BA and QMD. We observed only minimal differences in plot level BA, QMD, and TPH predictions between models using original and corrected intensity. We attribute this to: (i) the lower effectiveness of radiometric correction in forest versus grassland, bare soil and road land cover types, and (ii) the effect of spatial resolution on intensity noise.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".