MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399201673 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2023-0187

Att-Mask R-CNN: an individual tree crown instance segmentation method based on fused attention mechanism

2024· article· en· W4399201673 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Wenjing Chen, Zhihao Guan, Demin Gao

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTree (set theory)Crown (dentistry)Artificial intelligenceMechanism (biology)SegmentationPattern recognition (psychology)Computer scienceForestryMathematicsGeographyCombinatoricsMaterials sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tree detection and canopy area measurement are important and difficult tasks in forest inventory, which are important for understanding forest stand structure. This study utilized remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) aerial photography technology to collect remote sensing images of forests in Xiong County, China, creating a dataset comprising 1200 images of six tree species. Based on this dataset, the paper proposes an optimized model, Att-Mask R-CNN, for canopy detection and segmentation. Att-Mask R-CNN outperforms the original models (Mask R-CNN and MS R-CNN) by achieving 65.29% mean average precision for detection, 80.44% mean intersection over union for segmentation, and 90.67% overall recognition rate for the six tree species. In addition, a pixel statistics method based on segmentation masks is introduced for estimating the vertical projected area of individual tree crowns, and comparisons between the measured and predicted vertical projected area of the crowns of six tree species (100 trees of each class) show an overall goodness-of-fit R2 of 85% and a relative root-mean-square error rRMSE of 12.81%. By using remote sensing images from RPAs and optimizing existing deep learning models, the detection and segmentation of individual tree canopies can be achieved, resulting in a more accurate understanding of forest structure, which provides scientific support for forest management and resource monitoring.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207