MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3131711016 · doi:10.5558/tfc2021-009

Assessing single photon LiDAR for operational implementation of an enhanced forest inventory in diverse mixedwood forests

2021· article· en· W3131711016 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Joanne C. White, Margaret Penner, Murray Woods

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Forestry Chronicle · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Natural Resources and ForestryNatural Resources CanadaCanadian Forest Service
FundersCanadian Forest ServiceU.S. Forest ServiceCanadian Nuclear Laboratories
KeywordsForest inventoryBasal areaLidarEnvironmental scienceRemote sensingForest managementForestryBiomass (ecology)GeographyAgroforestryEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Airborne laser scanning (ALS; LiDAR) data are an increasingly common data source for forest inventories, and approaches integrating ALS data with field plot measurements have become operational in several jurisdictions. As technology continues to evolve, different LiDAR sensors can provide new opportunities to incorporate LiDAR data into forest inventory workflows. Single photon LiDAR (SPL) enables efficient, large area data acquisition and merits further investigation for forest inventory applications. Herein, we investigated the capacity of leaf-on SPL data, combined with 269 field plots, for estimating forest inventory attributes in the Great Lakes–St. Lawrence mixedwood forests of southern Ontario, Canada. Inventory attribute estimates were validated at the stand level using independent reference data acquired for 27 intensively sampled stands. Top height, Lorey’s height, gross total volume for merchantable stems, merchantable stem volume, basal area, quadratic mean diameter, and total aboveground biomass were estimated with a relative RMSE of 13.52%, 7.24%, 14.61%, 16.27%, 14.42%, 12.25%, and 11.72%, respectively. Relative bias was < 1% for all attributes except top height (10.34%), merchantable volume (3.37%), and basal area (1.68%). Accuracy and bias varied by forest type and stand-level validation was important for assessing model performance in different stand conditions. SPL data can be used to generate accurate, area-based forest inventories in mixedwood forests that have a multitude of tree species and complex forest management histories.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.355
Threshold uncertainty score0.922

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations28
Published2021
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Forestry ChronicleSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207