MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3108705003 · doi:10.3390/rs12223797

Beyond Measurement: Extracting Vegetation Height from High Resolution Imagery with Deep Learning

2020· article· en· W3108705003 on OpenAlexaff
David Radke, Daniel Radke, John Radke

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLidarRemote sensingVegetation (pathology)Aerial imageryPhotogrammetryElevation (ballistics)Digital elevation modelMultispectral imageHigh resolutionSatellite imageryEnvironmental scienceGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Measuring and monitoring the height of vegetation provides important insights into forest age and habitat quality. These are essential for the accuracy of applications that are highly reliant on up-to-date and accurate vegetation data. Current vegetation sensing practices involve ground survey, photogrammetry, synthetic aperture radar (SAR), and airborne light detection and ranging sensors (LiDAR). While these methods provide high resolution and accuracy, their hardware and collection effort prohibits highly recurrent and widespread collection. In response to the limitations of current methods, we designed Y-NET, a novel deep learning model to generate high resolution models of vegetation from highly recurrent multispectral aerial imagery and elevation data. Y-NET’s architecture uses convolutional layers to learn correlations between different input features and vegetation height, generating an accurate vegetation surface model (VSM) at 1×1 m resolution. We evaluated Y-NET on 235 km2 of the East San Francisco Bay Area and find that Y-NET achieves low error from LiDAR when tested on new locations. Y-NET also achieves an R2 of 0.83 and can effectively model complex vegetation through side-by-side visual comparisons. Furthermore, we show that Y-NET is able to identify instances of vegetation growth and mitigation by comparing aerial imagery and LiDAR collected at different times.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.918
Threshold uncertainty score0.704

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations18
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207