Abstract

In the field of quantitative remote sensing of forest biomass, a prominent phenomenon is the increasing number of explanatory variables. Then how to effectively select explanatory variables has become an important issue. Linear regression model is one of the commonly used remote sensing models. In the process of establishing the linear regression model, a vital step is to select explanatory variables. Focusing on variable selection and model stability, this paper conducts a comparative study on the performance of eight linear regression parameter estimation methods (Stepwise Regression Method (SR), Criterions Based on The Bayes Method (BIC), Criterions Based on The Bayes Method (AIC), Criterions Based on Prediction Error (Cp), Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (Lasso), Adaptive Lasso, Smoothly Clipped Absolute Deviation (SCAD), Non-negative garrote (NNG)) in the subtropical forest biomass remote sensing model development. For the purpose of comparison, OLS and RR, are commonly used as methods with no variable selection ability, and are also compared and discussed. The performance of five aspects are evaluated in this paper: (i) Determination coefficient, prediction error, model error, etc., (ii) significance test about the difference between determination coefficients, (iii) parameter stability, (iv) variable selection stability and (v) variable selection ability of the methods. All the results are obtained through a five ten-fold CV. Some evaluation indexes are calculated with or without degrees of freedom. The results show that BIC performs best in comprehensive evaluation, while NNG, Cp and AIC perform poorly as a whole. Other methods show a great difference in the performance on each index. SR has a strong capability in variable selection, although it is poor in commonly used indexes. The short-wave infrared band and the texture features derived from it are selected most frequently by various methods, indicating that these variables play an important role in forest biomass estimation. Some of the conclusions in this paper are likely to change as the study object changes. The ultimate goal of this paper is to introduce various model establishment methods with variable selection capability, so that we can have more choices when establishing similar models, and we can know how to select the most appropriate and effective method for specific problems.

Highlights

  • The importance of forest ecosystem services function has been universally acknowledged, especially in that it plays an important role in maintaining global carbon balance

  • Each estimate was based on different modeling and test data (See the introductions in the part of ten-fold cross-validation to know difference in modeling and test data)

  • That is the number of variables selected by non-negative garrote (NNG) is large, and the performance is bad

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The importance of forest ecosystem services function has been universally acknowledged, especially in that it plays an important role in maintaining global carbon balance. In order to meet large-area forest biomass surveys, currently an effective rapid estimation method is the forest AGB survey which combines remote sensing images and plot data. Zheng et al [16] used multiple regression analysis to couple the AGB values which are obtained from the field measurements of the DBH to the various vegetation indices derived from the landsat 7 ETM+ data, thereby generating an initial biomass map. Based on Landsat TM, ALOS PALSAR data, Gao et al [19] used parameters, non-parametric and machine learning methods to conduct forest biomass research and found that the linear regression method was still an important tool for AGB modeling, especially the AGB range of 40–120 Mg/Ha; he found that machine learning and nonparametric algorithms have limited effectiveness in improving AGB estimates within this range. Zhao et al [20] used TM, PALSAR, image band and texture information as alternative variables in their research, and used the multivariate SR method to establish the biomass estimation model

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.