Predictions of Biomass Change in a Hemi-Boreal Forest Based on Multi-Polarization L- and P-Band SAR Backscatter
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Above-ground biomass change accumulated during four growth seasons in a hemi-boreal forest was predicted using airborne L- and P-band synthetic aperture radar (SAR) backscatter. The radar data were collected in the BioSAR 2007 and BioSAR 2010 campaigns over the Remningstorp test site in southern Sweden. Regression models for biomass change were developed from biomass maps created using airborne LiDAR data and field measurements. To facilitate training and prediction on image pairs acquired at different dates, a backscatter offset correction method for L-band data was developed and evaluated. The correction, based on the HV/VV backscatter ratio, facilitated predictions across image pairs almost identical to those obtained using data from the same image pair for both training and prediction. For P-band, previous positive results using an offset correction based on the HH/VV ratio were validated. The best L-band model achieved a root mean square error (RMSE) of 21 t/ha, and the best P-band model achieved an RMSE of 19 t/ha. Those accuracies are similar to that of the LiDAR-based biomass change of 18 t/ha. The limitation of using LiDAR-based data for training was considered. The findings demonstrate potential for improved biomass change predictions from L-band backscatter despite varying environmental conditions and calibration uncertainties.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".