High-resolution mapping of tree species and associated uncertainty by combining aerial remote sensing data and convolutional neural networks ensemble
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mapping tree species diversity is essential for monitoring and managing forest ecosystems. Automating ecoforestry mapping using remote sensing images remains an important challenge due to the tremendous variability in forest covers and the conditions under which images used for classification are acquired. Deep learning algorithms have been increasingly used over the last few years to analyse remote sensing data for mapping tree species. However, most of these studies focus only on a small number of species or a limited area and avoid providing a spatially explicit representation of the uncertainty related to the predictions, rendering them unsuitable for operational use. In this study, we used an ensemble of convolutional neural networks to map forest species and land cover types across a 10,000 km 2 area in Quebec, Canada, spanning mixed and boreal forests. We built a georeferenced label database to train and test nine models, which resulted from the combination of three training datasets and three-commonly used convolutional neural network architectures (VGG16, ResNet50v2, Densenet121). These models were trained on multiband aerial photographs and a canopy height model derived from airborne lidar point clouds and used to map the diversity and distribution of tree species and land cover types. The level of agreement among models was used to generate uncertainty maps. The performance of the super-ensemble using 1311 independent forest inventory plots and assessed the extent to which uncertainty maps could serve as a spatially explicit indicator of model performance. The super-ensemble achieved 90% global accuracy. Our results indicated that the performance of the super-ensemble surpassed that of all individual architectures while also showing a positive effect of the canopy height model on performance. The comparison of the super-ensemble map with the proportion of basal area measured in forest inventory plots confirmed the reliability of the model over the study area. Our results also indicated that mapping the inter-model agreement provides a reliable spatially explicit estimate of model performance. The robustness and reliability of the proposed approach support its use in an operational context while also providing a conceptual framework to evaluate the reliability of uncertainty maps. • Tree species and land cover were mapped over 10,000 km 2 using a convolutional neural network ensemble. • We present and validate a new approach for assessing the reliability of uncertainty maps. • The super-ensemble demonstrates the best performance and offers a reliable assessment of uncertainty. • The canopy height model improves performance compared to using only aerial digital photos.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".