Airborne laser scanning proxies of canopy light transmission in forests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reliable estimates of canopy light transmission are critical to understanding the structure and function of vegetation communities but are difficult and costly to attain by traditional field inventory methods. Airborne laser scanning (ALS) data uniquely provide multi-angular vertically resolved representation of canopy geometry across large geographic areas. While previous studies have proposed ALS indices of canopy light transmission, new algorithms based on theoretical advancements may improve existing models. Herein, we propose two new models of canopy light transmission (i.e., gap fraction, or Po, the inverse of angular canopy closure). We demonstrate the models against a suite of existing models and ancillary metrics, validated against convex spherical densiometer measurements for 950 field plots in the foothills of Alberta, Canada. We also tested the effects of synthetic hemispherical lens models on the performance of the proposed hemispherical Voronoi gap fraction (Phv) index. While vertical canopy cover metrics showed the best overall fit to field measurements, one new metric, point-density-normalized gap fraction (Ppdn), outperformed all other gap fraction metrics by two-fold. We provide suggestions for further algorithm enhancements based on validation data improvements. We argue that traditional field measurements are no longer appropriate for ‘ground-truthing’ modern LiDAR or SfM point cloud models, as the latter provide orders of magnitude greater sampling and coverage. We discuss the implications of this finding for LiDAR applications in forestry.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".