Quantifying Lidar Elevation Accuracy: Parameterization and Wavelength Selection for Optimal Ground Classifications Based on Time since Fire/Disturbance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pre- and post-fire airborne lidar data provide an opportunity to determine peat combustion/loss across broad spatial extents. However, lidar measurements of ground surface elevation are prone to uncertainties. Errors may be introduced in several ways, particularly associated with the timing of data collection and the classification of ground points. Ground elevation data must be accurate and precise when estimating relatively small elevation changes due to combustion and subsequent carbon losses. This study identifies the impact of post-fire vegetation regeneration on ground classification parameterizations for optimal accuracy using TerraScan and LAStools with airborne lidar data collected in three wavelengths: 532 nm, 1064 nm, and 1550 nm in low relief boreal peatland environments. While the focus of the study is on elevation accuracy and losses from fire, the research is also highly pertinent to hydrological modelling, forestry, geomorphological change, etc. The study area includes burned and unburned boreal peatlands south of Fort McMurray, Alberta. Lidar and field validation data were collected in July 2018, following the 2016 Horse River Wildfire. An iterative ground classification analysis was conducted whereby validation points were compared with lidar ground-classified data in five environments: road, unburned, burned with shorter vegetative regeneration (SR), burned with taller vegetative regeneration (TR), and cumulative burned (both SR and TR areas) in each of the three laser emission wavelengths individually, as well as combinations of 1550 nm and 1064 nm and 1550 nm, 1064 nm, and 532 nm. We find an optimal average elevational offset of ~0.00 m in SR areas with a range (RMSE) of ~0.09 m using 532 nm data. Average accuracy remains the same in cumulative burned and TR areas, but RMSE increased to ~0.13 m and ~0.16 m, respectively, using 1550 nm and 1064 nm combined data. Finally, data averages ~0.01 m above the field-measured ground surface in unburned boreal peatland and transition areas (RMSE of ~0.19 m) using all wavelengths combined. We conclude that the ‘best’ offset for depth of burn within boreal peatlands is expected to be ~0.01 m, with single point measurement uncertainties upwards of ~0.25 m (RMSE) in areas of tall, dense vegetation regeneration. The importance of classification parameterization identified in this study also highlights the need for more intelligent adaptative classification routines, which can be used in other environments.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".