MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402484115 · doi:10.1080/07038992.2024.2391319

Updating Forest Stand Inventories: Integration of Photo-Interpreted and Airborne Laser Scanning Forest Attributes Using Generic Region Merging Segmentation and kNN Imputation

2024· article· en· W4402484115 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Ethan E. Berman, Nicholas C. Coops, Geordie Robere-McGugan, Ian Sinclair, Grant McCartney, Alexis Achim

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Remote Sensing · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalMinistry of Natural Resources and ForestryUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSegmentationLaser scanningGeographyRemote sensingImputation (statistics)CartographyEnvironmental scienceForestryEnvironmental resource managementComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceLaserMachine learningMissing data

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Integrating airborne laser scanning (ALS) forest attributes with photo-interpreted forest stand age and species attributes can provide managers with the best information to drive estate planning, growth and yield projections, and forest operations. Photo-interpreted forest inventories provide certain forest attributes that are difficult to measure with ALS, yet are subjective and irregularly updated. ALS is objective and provides detailed estimates of forest structure attributes, but poorly estimates age and species composition. We used Generic Region Merging segmentation and k-nearest neighbor imputation to integrate photo-interpreted and ALS-derived forest attributes into a contemporary stand-based forest inventory. We first segmented gridded ALS attributes into forest stand polygons across a ∼630,000 ha managed forest in Ontario, Canada. We next applied imputation to a photo-interpreted inventory, assessing the influence of model parameters and imputed vs. observed values of age and species using leave-one-out cross-validation. Compared to the photo-interpreted inventory, the optimal imputation model estimated age with a mean absolute and mean bias difference of 16.06 and −0.14 years, and classified leading species with 65.46% accuracy. We lastly integrated imputed age and species attributes into the automatically segmented forest stand polygons, finding similar age and species distributions across the landscape when compared to the photo-interpreted inventory.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.242
Threshold uncertainty score0.481

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Remote SensingSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207