Synthesizing Disparate LiDAR and Satellite Datasets through Deep Learning to Generate Wall-to-Wall Regional Inventories for the Complex, Mixed-Species Forests of the Eastern United States
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Light detection and ranging (LiDAR) has become a commonly-used tool for generating remotely-sensed forest inventories. However, LiDAR-derived forest inventories have remained uncommon at a regional scale due to varying parameters among LiDAR data acquisitions and the availability of sufficient calibration data. Here, we present a model using a 3-D convolutional neural network (CNN), a form of deep learning capable of scanning a LiDAR point cloud, combined with coincident satellite data (spectral, phenology, and disturbance history). We compared this approach to traditional modeling used for making forest predictions from LiDAR data (height metrics and random forest) and found that the CNN had consistently lower uncertainty. We then applied the CNN to public data over six New England states in the USA, generating maps of 14 forest attributes at a 10 m resolution over 85% of the region. Aboveground biomass estimates produced a root mean square error of 36 Mg ha−1 (44%) and were within the 97.5% confidence of independent county-level estimates for 33 of 38 or 86.8% of the counties examined. CNN predictions for stem density and percentage of conifer attributes were moderately successful, while predictions for detailed species groupings were less successful. The approach shows promise for improving the prediction of forest attributes from regional LiDAR data and for combining disparate LiDAR datasets into a common framework for large-scale estimation.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".