Effect of shade on simultaneous estimation of non-photosynthetic and photosynthetic vegetation cover using the NDVI-NSSI normalized difference triangular space
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The non-photosynthetic vegetation – soil separation index (NSSI) and normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) can be used to simultaneously estimate the fractional cover of non-photosynthetic vegetation (fNPV), photosynthetic vegetation (fPV), and bare soil (fBS) in vegetation ecosystems. However, these estimates suffer from problems due to shading by dense vegetation or topography. Based on field-measured data and on hyperspectral data acquired by unmanned aerial vehicles, we analyse how shading affects the morphology of NDVI-NSSI and enhanced vegetation index – NSSI (EVI-NSSI). We also investigate the simultaneous estimation of fNPV, fPV, and fBS. The results show that the NDVI-NSSI normalized difference feature space mitigates the impact of shade. Shade causes the NDVI-NSSI and EVI-NSSI to shift rightward parallel to the BS axis and leftward parallel to the PV axis, respectively. Although such shifts may hinder the determination of NPV, PV, and BS endmembers, they do not affect the spectral separation of NPV. Overall, with the NDVI-NSSI and EVI-NSSI methods, the estimation error for fNPV under shaded conditions is approximately 5% greater than that under illuminated conditions. Shaded green vegetation more strongly affects the estimation error of fPV and fBS in EVI-NSSI than in NDVI-NSSI, whereas fBS and fPV depend more strongly on shade than fNPV.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".