MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401069793 · doi:10.1109/lgrs.2024.3434685

Improved Leaf Area Index Retrieval Using 3-D Point Clouds From UAV Imagery

2024· article· en· W4401069793 on OpenAlexaff
Minfeng Xing, Jie Yang, Yang Song, Jiali Shang, Xin Zhou, Jinfei Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceRemote sensingIndex (typography)Point cloudPoint (geometry)Image retrievalComputer visionGeographyImage (mathematics)MathematicsWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Leaf area index (LAI) serves as a key ecophysiological parameter for assessing plant growth and is particularly vital for crop monitoring. Using unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV)-based point cloud data generated through photogrammetry techniques offers valuable structural insights into crops, facilitating LAI retrieval. This study introduces a method for estimating LAI from 3-D point clouds. By employing spherical voxel partitioning, the vegetation gap fraction is computed based on the spatial distribution of point clouds. Furthermore, the leaf inclination angle is determined through triangular patch collections reconstructed from 3-D point clouds. Projection functions, accounting for varying zenith perspectives, are developed considering the leaf inclination angle. Subsequently, the combination of vegetation gap fraction and projection functions is used within the Beer–Lambert law framework to calculate LAI. Validation against ground measurements demonstrates a strong correlation between measured and retrieved LAI ($R^{2} = 0.64$, RMSE = 0.43), affirming the effectiveness of the proposed method in estimating LAI using UAV-based structure from motion (SfM) point cloud data.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations9
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing LettersSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207