MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4221045025 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu22-706

A non-destructive approach to estimate buttress volume using 3D point cloud data

2022· preprint· en· W4221045025 on OpenAlexaff
Tao Han, Connor Bax, Steven Wagers, Arturo Sánchez‐Azofeifa

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVolume (thermodynamics)Point cloudMathematicsAllometryAnimal scienceChemistryNuclear medicinePhysicsBiologyEcologyMedicineThermodynamicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Buttressed trees have one of the largest sources of variation in volume or biomass estimates in tropical forests. Buttresses provide mechanical support for trees and offer other essential ecological functions such as nutrient acquisition. Here, we use an Alpha Shape Algorithm (ASA) based on a 3D point cloud to estimate the volume of 30 buttressed trees collected using Terrestrial Photogrammetry (TP). We also calculated the buttresses volume using allometric models developed using the Diameter Above the Buttress (DAB) and the Diameter computed from non-convex (Darea130) and convex area (Dconvex130) at breast height (1.3 m). To demonstrate the broader generalization of our allometric models, we validated the developed models using independent data obtained by Terrestrial Laser Scanning (TLS) and destructive measurement. Volume estimated by the ASA showed a high agreement with the reference volume acquired by the Smalian formula (RRMSE of 0.08 and R2 = 0.99 regardless of species effect). Our results suggest that the DAB seems to be the most advanced predictor for volume, with the lowest Akaike information criterion (AIC) of -62.4 than the Darea130 (49.2)and the Dconvex130 (30.3). At the same time, the DAB (RRMSE of 0.2) and Darea130 (RRMSE of 0.2) show similar performance when validated with independent data sets. Our results indicate that the ASA is more reliable and efficient than allometric models for buttress modelling. Our results also provide a solid foundation for buttress modelling, as we use more buttressed trees (45) for allometric model development than previous studies. Furthermore, the proposed non-destructive method can help to correct the bias in present and past estimates of volume and biomass of large trees, which are keystone components to understanding biomass allocation and dynamics in tropical forests.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicForest ecology and management→French-language works237,207→