The Forest Line Mapper: A Semi-Automated Tool for Mapping Linear Disturbances in Forests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Forest land-use planning and restoration requires effective tools for mapping and attributing linear disturbances such as roads, trails, and asset corridors over large areas. Most existing linear-feature databases are generated by heads-up digitizing. While suitable for cartographic purposes, these datasets often lack the fine spatial details and multiple attributes required for more demanding analytical applications. To address this need, we developed the Forest Line Mapper (FLM), a semi-automated software tool for mapping and attributing linear features using LiDAR-derived canopy height models. Accuracy assessments conducted in the boreal forest of Alberta, Canada showed that the FLM reliably predicts both the center line (polyline) and footprint (extent polygons) of a variety of linear-feature types including roads, pipelines, seismic lines, and power lines. Our analysis showed that FLM outputs were consistently more accurate than publicly available datasets produced by human photo-interpreters, and that the tool can be reliably deployed across large application areas. In addition to accurately delineating linear features, the FLM generates a variety of spatial attributes associated with line geometry and vegetation characteristics from input canopy height data. Our statistical evaluation indicates that spatial attributes generated by the FLM may be useful for studying and classifying linear features based on disturbance type and ground conditions. The FLM is open-source and freely available and is aimed to assist researchers and land managers working in forested environments everywhere.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".