UAV-Based Wellsite Reclamation Monitoring Using Transformer-Based Deep Learning on Multi-Seasonal LiDAR and Multispectral Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Monitoring reclaimed wellsites in boreal forest environments requires accurate, scalable, and repeatable methods for assessing vegetation recovery. This study evaluates the use of uncrewed aerial vehicle (UAV)-based light detection and ranging (LiDAR) and multispectral (MS) imagery for individual tree detection, crown delineation, and classification across five reclaimed wellsites in Alberta, Canada. A deep learning workflow using 3D convolutional neural networks was applied to LiDAR and MS data collected in spring, summer, and autumn. Results show that LiDAR alone provided high accuracy for tree segmentation and height estimation, with a mean intersection over union (mIoU) of 0.94 for vegetation filtering and an F1-score of 0.82 for treetop detection. Incorporating MS data improved deciduous/coniferous classification, with the highest accuracy (mIoU = 0.88) achieved using all five spectral bands. Coniferous species were classified more accurately than deciduous species, and classification performance declined for trees shorter than 2 m. Spring conditions yielded the highest classification accuracy (mIoU = 0.93). Comparisons with ground measurements confirmed a strong correlation for tree height estimation (R2 = 0.95; root mean square error = 0.40 m). Limitations of this technique included lower performance for short, multi-stemmed trees and deciduous species, particularly willow. This study demonstrates the value of integrating 3D structural and spectral data for monitoring forest recovery and supports the use of UAV remote sensing for scalable post-disturbance vegetation assessment. The trained models used in this study are publicly available through the TreeAIBox plugin to support further research and operational applications.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".