MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4411968843 · doi:10.1101/2025.06.27.661894

Monitoring tropical forests with light drones: ensuring spatial and temporal consistency in stereophotogrammetric products

2025· preprint· en· W4411968843 on OpenAlexaff
Nicolas Barbier, Pierre Ploton, Hadrien Tulet, Gaëlle Viennois, H. Leblanc, Benoît Burban, Maxime Réjou‐Méchain, Philippe Verley, James Ball, Denis Feurer, Grégoire Vincent

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsCanadian Nautical Research Society
FundersCentre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le DéveloppementAgence Nationale de la RechercheBiodiversa+
KeywordsConsistency (knowledge bases)DroneTropical forestGeographyEnvironmental scienceRemote sensingComputer scienceEcologyArtificial intelligenceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Light drones provide a cheap and effective tool to monitor forest canopy, especially in tropical and equatorial contexts, where infrastructure and resources are limiting. In these regions, good quality optical satellite images are rare, yet the stakes are maximal to characterize forest function, dynamics, diversity, and phenology, and more generally the vegetation-climate interplay. We describe a complete processing chain based on photogrammetric tools that seeks to optimize the spatial and spectral coherence between repeat image mosaics at centimetric resolution. Our target is to allow individual tree-level monitoring over tens to hundreds of hectare scales with consumer grade equipment (i.e., quadcopter with stabilized RGB camera, standard GNSS positioning). We demonstrate the increase in spatial precision achieved using Time-SIFT and Arosics algorithms, which allow (individually and synergistically) to reduce global and local spatial misalignment between mosaics from several meters to a few centimeters. Time-SIFT provides the advantage of increased robustness in initial image alignment and 3D reconstruction, and hence reduces occasional distortions or data gaps. Using Agisoft’s color and white balance corrections combined with the use of vegetation indices provides meaningful quantitative signal despite considerable changes in acquisition conditions. In particular, indices that are less sensitive to illumination changes, like the green chromatic coordinate (GCC), allowed evidencing a seasonal signal over four years of monitoring in the evergreen moist forest at Paracou in French Guiana. The signal was decorrelated from obvious geometrical effect (sun height), and provided information on the vegetative stage at tree, species, and stand levels. Data/Code for peer review The complete processing chain, as well as the data and scripts used for producing the analyses presented here, are available for review on Zenodo: https://zenodo.org/records/15449377?token=eyJhbGciOiJIUzUxMiJ9.eyJpZCI6IjdjNWExMzIzLThkNDMtNDllNy1iYWY4LTY2MGZlZjkyZmQ3OCIsImRhdGEiOnt9LCJyYW5kb20iOiI5MGQ4NTE2YTE4OGViNDQ3YTFiZmMyYTFkZDlhZTZmMiJ9.CsJ0VRuQ90A1qzO1VJC1Q9eXFSp1N5UpeJlyr6otgXRPlf-I-jcwBJ6ytiBbbu8enCNJ2Ke6-oxNV8aeJ_AWIw

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications→French-language works237,207→