Accuracy of forest inventory using airborne laser scanning: evaluating the first nordic full-scale operational project

By Erik Næsset. 2004

251 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Environmental Engineering, Insect Science, Nature and Landscape Conservation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0e2843b18564b0896e5c51aed45f6a2546736b5d

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Environmental Engineering

In Insect Science

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

Citations in the corpus

Estimation of tree lists from airborne laser scanning by combining single-tree and area-based methods (2010, methodology): “The Weibull distribution has been commonly used to describe tree size-related distributions such as DBH and basal area (Gobakken and Næsset 2004, Maltamo et al. 2007).”
Mini-UAV-Borne LIDAR for Fine-Scale Mapping (2011, background): “to map data with classic scanning systems of more than one laser pulse per square meter [5].”
Airborne laser scanning as a method in operational forest inventory: Status of accuracy assessments accomplished in Scandinavia (2007, methodology): “2 m3 ha 1 2.6 11.5 Næsset (2004a)a 65 Stand volume Mature pine-dominated 1.0 37 19 162.”
Model-based inference for biomass estimation in a LiDAR sample survey in Hedmark County, Norway (2011, methodology): “The canopy densities were then computed as the proportion of number of returns above a given layer to total number of returns including those below 1.3 m, see Næsset (2004a) for further details.”
Estimation of stand variables in Pinus radiata D. Don plantations using different LiDAR pulse densities (2012, background): “…et al., 2010); dominant height (Næsset, 2002, 2004; Lovell et al., 2005; Stephens et al., 2007; Rombouts et al., 2008; Treitz et al., 2010); stem number (Næsset, 2002, 2004; Hall et al., 2005; Treitz et al., 2010); total aboveground biomass (Hall et al., 2005; Treitz et al., 2010); foliage…”
Comparison of small-footprint discrete return and full waveform airborne lidar data for estimating multiple forest variables (2016, background): “467 However, many only predict a relatively limited number of forest metrics (e.g. Hudak et al., 468 2009; Hyyppä et al., 2008; Li et al., 2014; Lim et al., 2003; Næsset 2004; Richardson & 469 Moskal, 2011).”