MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415530824 · doi:10.3791/68745

Collecting and Processing Drone-based Remotely Sensed Data for Use in Forest Recovery Monitoring

2025· article· en· W4415530824 on OpenAlexaff
Dmytro Movchan, Zhouxin Xi, Angeline Van Dongen, Dani Degenhardt

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Visualized Experiments · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources CanadaCanadian Forest Service
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLidarVegetation (pathology)Multispectral imageLand reclamationProtocol (science)SuiteScalability

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Remote sensing (RS) technologies, particularly light detection and ranging (LiDAR) and multispectral (MS) imagery, provide broad-scale vegetation monitoring capabilities at varying spatial resolutions. Remotely piloted aircraft systems (RPAS) equipped with LiDAR and MS sensors can enhance vegetation assessments by offering flexible flight schedules and capturing fine-resolution data. Further integration of deep learning (DL) models holds promise for automating the post-processing workflow, which is particularly important for vegetation monitoring applications. This protocol outlines a suite of practical methods for collecting, processing, aligning, and merging RPAS-based LiDAR and MS data for individual 3D tree delineation using an interactive DL plugin. The proprietary DL model effectively detects and segments tree boundaries across various sensors, study sites, and data resolutions within forest ecosystems. Our specific application and motivation for developing this protocol and tool is for monitoring forest recovery on reclaimed oil and gas wellsites. Currently field-based assessment methods are time-consuming, labor-intensive, and spatially limited. As reclamation efforts expand, there is a growing need for more efficient, and scalable approaches to monitor reclamation success and ecosystem recovery. By advancing RPAS-based DL applications, this research supports the monitoring of ecological recovery on reclaimed wellsites and is also applicable to other forested landscapes.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.354 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Visualized ExperimentsSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207