MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

RETRIEVAL OF LEAF AREA INDEX AND LEAF CHLOROPHYLL CONTENT FROM HYPERSPECTRAL DATA USING DEEP LEARNING NETWORKS

2022· article· en· W4281937670 on OpenAlexafffund
Baoxin Hu, W. M. Jung, Jiangui Liu, Jiali Shang

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œinternational archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences/International archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLeaf Properties and Growth Measurement
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHyperspectral imagingLeaf area indexRemote sensingAutoencoderVegetation (pathology)Convolutional neural networkPhotochemical Reflectance IndexGround truthDeep learningChlorophyllEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceMathematicsArtificial intelligenceNormalized Difference Vegetation IndexBotanyGeographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. This study aimed to exploit the use of deep learning networks in the retrieval of the biophysical and biochemical parameters of vegetation canopies. Convolutional Neural Network (CNN), network with only fully connected layers, referred as dense network (DNN), and Autoencoder (AE) were investigated to retrieve leaf area index (LAI) and leaf chlorophyll content. Hyperspectral data simulated by the coupled PROSPECT and SAIL model were used for training and validation. The real CASI hyperspectral data in 50 spectral channels ranging from 522.4 nm to 894.2 nm collected over three agricultural crop fields during the growing season of 2001 were used, together with the in-situ measured LAI and leaf chlorophyll content, as independent test set. Occlusion analysis was also employed to determine the important spectral bands at which reflectance made more contributions to the retrieval with a CNN and interpret the latent variables of the AE. Satisfactory results from these deep learning networks were obtained, compared with ground truth. The DNN with the input of the vegetation indices sensitive to LAI and leaf chlorophyll content (MTVI2 and TCARI/OSAVI) generated the best results with R2 of 0.86 for LAI and 0.55 for leaf chlorophyll content.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.971
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œinternational archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences/International archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciencesSame topicLeaf Properties and Growth MeasurementFrench-language works237,207