MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411173830 · doi:10.1080/07038992.2025.2505418

Estimation of Forest Structure and Fuel Change Across Mountain Pine Beetle – Attacked Forests Using Mobile and RPAS – Based LiDAR

2025· article· en· W4411173830 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Evan C. Gerbrecht, Nicholas C. Coops, Allan L. Carroll, Christopher W. Bater, Leonard Buechner

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Remote Sensing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources CanadaCanadian Forest ServiceUniversity of British Columbia
FundersfRI Research
KeywordsLidarMountain pine beetleGeographyEnvironmental sciencePine forestRemote sensingForestryClimate changeAgroforestryEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The recent mountain pine beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae) outbreak has resulted in widespread mortality of pine trees across western Canada over the past two decades. The changes to forest structure caused by the beetle are well known through ground-based observations. However, the potential changes to fuels for wildfires associated with altered forest structure are not well known nor incorporated into fire fuel models. In this study, we used light detection and ranging (LiDAR) to quantify variations in forest structure and wildfire fuels caused by mountain pine beetle (MPB) infestation. From this data, we created models that characterize fuels following MPB attack. LiDAR metrics were extracted from three-dimensional point clouds acquired using remotely piloted aircraft systems (RPAS) and mobile laser scanning (MLS), both individually and combined. Fuel components in the stand were then modeled across a range of MPB attack severities. Results indicated the fused model was most accurate at predicting canopy fuel load (R2 = 0.80), while MLS had the best model performance for shrub fuel load (R2 = 0.68) and coarse woody debris fuel load (R2 = 0.68). This study demonstrates the ability of LiDAR to accurately characterize forest fuel loads in MPB-infested forests.

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)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.133

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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