CNN-based transfer learning for forest aboveground biomass prediction from ALS point cloud tomography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study presents a new approach for predicting forest aboveground biomass (AGB) from airborne laser scanning (ALS) data: AGB is predicted from sequences of images depicting vertical cross-sections through the ALS point clouds. A 3D version of the VGG16 convolutional neural network (CNN) with initial weights transferred from pre-training on the ImageNet dataset was used. The approach was tested on datasets from Canada, Poland, and the Czech Republic. To analyse the effect of training sample size on model performance, different-sized samples ranging from 10 to 375 ground plots were used. The CNNs were compared with random forest models (RFs) trained on point cloud metrics. At the maximum number of training samples, the difference in RMSE between observed and predicted AGB of CNNs and RFs ranged from −2 t/ha to 5 t/ha, and the difference in squared Pearson correlation coefficient ranged from −0.05 to 0.06. Additional pre-training on synthetic data derived from virtual laser scanning of simulated forest stands could only improve the prediction performance of the CNNs when only a few real training samples (10–40) were available. While 3D CNNs trained on cross-section images derived from real data showed promising results, RFs remain a competitive alternative.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".