Estimating species-specific leaf area index and basal area using optical and SAR remote sensing data in Acadian mixed spruce-fir forests, USA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study combined Sentinel-1 synthetic aperture radar (SAR), Sentinel-2 multispectral, and site variable datasets to model leaf area index (LAI) and basal area per ha (BAPH) of two economically important tree species in Northeast, USA; red spruce (Picea rubens Sarg.; RS), and balsam fir (Abies balsamea (L.) Mill.; BF). We used Random Forest (RF), and Multi-Layer Perceptron (MLP) algorithms for LAI and BAPH modeling. The results showed that RF outperformed MLP by reducing the normalized root mean square error (nRMSE) by 0.01 and 0.06 for LAI and BAPH, respectively. The final variables selected for modeling of both LAI and BAPH indicated the superiority of Sentinel-2 variables over the Sentinel-1 SAR with minor contributions of site variables (mainly elevation). The red-edge spectral vegetation indices played a significant role in both LAI and BAPH estimation. We attained the lowest nRMSEs of 0.12, and 0.16 for the final LAI model of RS, and BF, respectively using Sentinel-2 and site variables. The lowest nRMSE for both RS and BF BAPH models was 0.12. As RS and BF are the primary host species for a cyclically occurring and most destructive pest of the region, eastern spruce budworm (Choristoneura fumiferana; SBW), these estimations will be useful to evaluate SBW dynamics in the region.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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 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".