MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205698403 · doi:10.1016/j.rse.2021.112845

Aboveground biomass density models for NASA’s Global Ecosystem Dynamics Investigation (GEDI) lidar mission

2022· article· en· W4205698403 on OpenAlexafffund
Laura Duncanson, James R. Kellner, John Armston, Ralph Dubayah, David Minor, Steven Hancock, Sean P. Healey, Paul L. Patterson, Svetlana Saarela, Suzanne Marselis, Carlos E. Silva, Jamis M. Bruening, S. J. Goetz, Hao Tang, M. A. Hofton, Bryan Blair, S. B. Luthcke, Temilola Fatoyinbo, Katharine Abernethy, Alfonso Alonso, Hans‐Erik Andersen, Paul Aplin, Timothy R. Baker, Nicolas Barbier, Jean François Bastin, Peter Biber, Pascal Boeckx, Jan Bogaert, Luigi Boschetti, Peter B. Boucher, Doreen S. Boyd, David F. R. P. Burslem, Sofía Calvo-Rodríguez, Jérôme Chave, Robin L. Chazdon, David B. Clark, Deborah A. Clark, Warren B. Cohen, David A. Coomes, Piermaria Corona, K. C. Cushman, Mark Cutler, James W. Dalling, Michele Dalponte, Jonathan P. Dash, Sergio de‐Miguel, Songqiu Deng, Peter W. Ellis, Barend Erasmus, Patrick A. Fekety, Alfredo Fernández-Landa, António Ferraz, Rico Fischer, Adrian Fisher, Antonio García‐Abril, Terje Gobakken, Jörg Hacker, Marco Heurich, Ross A. Hill, Chris Hopkinson, Huabing Huang, Stephen P. Hubbell, Andrew T. Hudak, Andreas Huth, Kathryn J. Jeffery, Masato Katoh, Elizabeth Kearsley, David Kenfack, Natascha Kljun, Nikolai Knapp, Kamil Král, Martin Krůček, Nicolas Labrière, Simon L. Lewis, Marcos Longo, Richard Lucas, Russell Main, J. A. Manzanera, Renaud Mathieu, Herve R. Memiaghe, Victoria Meyer, Abel Monteagudo Mendoza, A. Monerris, Paul Montesano, Felix Morsdorf, Erik Næsset, Laven Naidoo, Reuben Nilus, Michael J. O’Brien, David A. Orwig, Konstantinos Papathanassiou, Geoffrey G. Parker, Christopher D. Philipson, Oliver L. Phillips, Jan Písek, John R. Poulsen, Hans Pretzsch, Christoph Rüdiger, Sassan Saatchi, Arturo Sánchez‐Azofeifa, Nuria Sánchez‐López, Robert J. Scholes, Carlos Alberto Silva, Marc Simard, Andrew K. Skidmore, Krzysztof Stereńczak, Mihai A. Tanase, Chiara Torresan, Rubén Valbuena, Hans Verbeeck, Tomáš Vrška, Konrad Wessels, Joanne C. White, Lee White, Eliakimu Zahabu, Carlo Zgraggen

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing of Environment · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersAustralian Research CouncilNatural Environment Research CouncilSmithsonian Tropical Research InstituteSmithsonian Conservation Biology InstituteDirektoratet for UtviklingssamarbeidSouth African National ParksCentre National d’Etudes SpatialesSight Research UKOrganismo Autónomo de Parques NacionalesNarodowy Fundusz Ochrony Środowiska i Gospodarki WodnejU.S. Forest ServiceAgence Nationale de la RechercheBattelleAustralian GovernmentGordon and Betty Moore FoundationUnited States Agency for International DevelopmentNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of MarylandSmithsonian InstitutionU.S. Department of StateNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationEmpresa Brasileira de Pesquisa AgropecuáriaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsRemote sensingLidarEnvironmental scienceBiomass (ecology)EcosystemGeographyEcologyGeologyOceanographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

NASA’s Global Ecosystem Dynamics Investigation (GEDI) is collecting spaceborne full waveform lidar data with a primary science goal of producing accurate estimates of forest aboveground biomass density (AGBD). This paper presents the development of the models used to create GEDI’s footprint-level (~25 m) AGBD (GEDI04_A) product, including a description of the datasets used and the procedure for final model selection. The data used to fit our models are from a compilation of globally distributed spatially and temporally coincident field and airborne lidar datasets, whereby we simulated GEDI-like waveforms from airborne lidar to build a calibration database. We used this database to expand the geographic extent of past waveform lidar studies, and divided the globe into four broad strata by Plant Functional Type (PFT) and six geographic regions. GEDI’s waveform-to-biomass models take the form of parametric Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) models with simulated Relative Height (RH) metrics as predictor variables. From an exhaustive set of candidate models, we selected the best input predictor variables, and data transformations for each geographic stratum in the GEDI domain to produce a set of comprehensive predictive footprint-level models. We found that model selection frequently favored combinations of RH metrics at the 98th, 90th, 50th, and 10th height above ground-level percentiles (RH98, RH90, RH50, and RH10, respectively), but that inclusion of lower RH metrics (e.g. RH10) did not markedly improve model performance. Second, forced inclusion of RH98 in all models was important and did not degrade model performance, and the best performing models were parsimonious, typically having only 1-3 predictors. Third, stratification by geographic domain (PFT, geographic region) improved model performance in comparison to global models without stratification. Fourth, for the vast majority of strata, the best performing models were fit using square root transformation of field AGBD and/or height metrics. There was considerable variability in model performance across geographic strata, and areas with sparse training data and/or high AGBD values had the poorest performance. These models are used to produce global predictions of AGBD, but will be improved in the future as more and better training data become available.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.097

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations435
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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