2014
DOI: 10.3390/rs61110750
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Estimation of Airborne Lidar-Derived Tropical Forest Canopy Height Using Landsat Time Series in Cambodia

Abstract: Abstract:In this study, we test and demonstrate the utility of disturbance and recovery information derived from annual Landsat time series to predict current forest vertical structure (as compared to the more common approaches, that consider a sample of airborne Lidar and single-date Landsat derived variables). Mean Canopy Height (MCH) was estimated separately using single date, time series, and the combination of single date and time series variables in multiple regression and random forest (RF) models. The … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
23
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 32 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 68 publications
2
23
0
Order By: Relevance
“…From an overall statistical perspective, the predicted and observed volumes were equivalent, although our RF model validations showed a systematic tendency to overestimate small values and underestimate high values. The same was found in previous studies (e.g., [40,57]). According to one study [57], a possible cause might be that because the RF model estimates values by averaging the predictions of many decision trees, it might tend to underestimate when the predicted value is close to the maximum value of the training data.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 79%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…From an overall statistical perspective, the predicted and observed volumes were equivalent, although our RF model validations showed a systematic tendency to overestimate small values and underestimate high values. The same was found in previous studies (e.g., [40,57]). According to one study [57], a possible cause might be that because the RF model estimates values by averaging the predictions of many decision trees, it might tend to underestimate when the predicted value is close to the maximum value of the training data.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 79%
“…The same was found in previous studies (e.g., [40,57]). According to one study [57], a possible cause might be that because the RF model estimates values by averaging the predictions of many decision trees, it might tend to underestimate when the predicted value is close to the maximum value of the training data. Similarly, when the estimated value is close to the minimum value of training data it might tend to overestimate.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 79%
“…The Random Forest (RF) technique is known to be a performant regression method that is becoming widely used by the remote sensing community for, among other, canopy height estimation (e.g., [10,37]), and biomass estimation [33,34,38]. The main advantage of Random Forest is its incorporation of continuous or qualitative predictors without making assumptions about their statistical distribution or covariance structure [36].…”
Section: Canopy Height Trend Mapping Using Random Forest Regressionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…rRMSE " RMSE yˆ1 00 (14) whereŷ i is the estimated basal area or canopy closure or volume, y i is the measured basal area or canopy closure or volume, n is the number of observations and y is the mean of the measured variable (basal area or canopy closure or volume). The LOOCV has the advantage of providing an unbiased estimation of the prediction error [23].…”
Section: Validationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Further, accurate estimates of structural variables are practical indicators for determining forest evolutionary history [8], monitoring forest sustainability [9], assessing insect infestation susceptibility [10,11], studying wildlife management and biodiversity [12], as well as forest water flux modeling [13]. Accordingly, there is an increasing need to generate accurate information regarding forest structural dynamics [14].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%