2017
DOI: 10.3832/ifor1891-009
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Modelling dasometric attributes of mixed and uneven-aged forests using Landsat-8 OLI spectral data in the Sierra Madre Occidental, Mexico

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
7
1

Year Published

2018
2018
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
1
7
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In our study, the performance of SVR was better than RF. The results of the optimized SVR model in the current study (R 2 = 0.80, RMSE = 8.20 Mg ha −1 ), are higher than previous results with in the SMO with non-parametric algorithms such as regression trees [16], MP5 model trees [15] and MARS techniques [23], with R 2 in the range 0.5-0.7 and RMSE values of 20-38 Mg ha −1 (20-40% of the average value). They also improve the previous results with SVR in the area of study with a smaller dataset of 99 plots [21], with R 2 of 0.62 and RMSE of 27 Mg ha −1 , obtaining similar results for the case of RF (R 2 of 0.48 and RMSE of 31 Mgha −1 ).…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 75%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…In our study, the performance of SVR was better than RF. The results of the optimized SVR model in the current study (R 2 = 0.80, RMSE = 8.20 Mg ha −1 ), are higher than previous results with in the SMO with non-parametric algorithms such as regression trees [16], MP5 model trees [15] and MARS techniques [23], with R 2 in the range 0.5-0.7 and RMSE values of 20-38 Mg ha −1 (20-40% of the average value). They also improve the previous results with SVR in the area of study with a smaller dataset of 99 plots [21], with R 2 of 0.62 and RMSE of 27 Mg ha −1 , obtaining similar results for the case of RF (R 2 of 0.48 and RMSE of 31 Mgha −1 ).…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 75%
“…Whereas this approach is valuable and can be precise at a local scale, it is also expensive and time consuming, and inherently limited in geographic representativeness [10,11]. The natural variation in forest structure and biomass, combined with the enormous geographic extent and rate of forest loss and disturbance, makes field plots difficult to use (alone) for assessing forest biomass and carbon densities [12], particularly over large areas [13][14][15] such as Mexican forests [16]. The use of remote-sensing techniques, calibrated and validated with representative field sites of forest biomass monitoring, allows spatially representative maps of forest ecosystems' structure and productivity to be derived, over larger areas, and at lower costs [17,18].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Due to easy accessibility and affordability, a number of studies have employed Landsat images and found statistically significant correlations between remotely sensed data and dendrometric characteristics using ground plots ranging from 315 to 2500 m 2 (Dube and Mutanga 2015, López-Sánchez et al 2014, Zhang et al 2014, López-Serrano et al 2016.…”
Section: Dataset Integrationmentioning
confidence: 99%