SCIENCE@home

Reconstructing the digital twin of forests from a 3D library: Quantifying trade-offs for radiative transfer modeling

Chang Liu,K. Calders,N. Origo,Mathias Disney,F. Meunier,William Woodgate,J. Gastellu‐Etchegorry,Joanne Nightingale,E. Honkavaara,T. Hakala,L. Markelin,Hans Verbeeck

Published 2023 in Remote Sensing of Environment

ABSTRACT

Radiative transfer models that use spatially explicit 3D models to represent forest structure can simulate highly realistic Earth Observation (EO) data. Such simulations at the forest stand scale (≥ 1-ha) allow for more direct calibration and validation of EO products. Explicitly reconstructing 3D forest structures at scales that can be compared directly with satellite EO data (i.e., dozens to hundreds of meters) is challenging. Reconstructing large forest areas (≥ 1-ha) using a representative subset (i.e., forest subsampling) is a potentially more practical and feasible method. However, the impacts of forest subsampling on radiative transfer (RT) modeling were never formally tested in the spatially explicit forest scene. This study quantified the trade-offs involved in two main subsampling approaches when reconstructing the spatially explicit scene of a real forest for RT modeling. The two subsampling approaches were: (1) subplot subsampling - area-based, using the subplot (i.e. a fixed area) as the basic sampling and reconstruction unit; and (2) tree library subsampling - tree-based, using the individual tree as the basic sampling and reconstruction unit. We used the Discrete Anisotropic Radiative Transfer Model (DART) to simulate the Bidirectional Reflectance Factor (BRF) of the completely reconstructed 1-ha 3D-explicit forest scene, as well as the simplified forest scenes built from various subsets of the same forest. The simulated reflectance deviation of the simplified forest scenes was evaluated by comparing it with the fully reconstructed forest scene. The results showed that for subplot subsampling, as the sampling fraction increased from 10% to 90%, the normalized mean BRF deviation of radiative transfer simulations decreased from -2.7% to -0.0034% and its standard deviation decreased from 7.7% to 0.54%. Additionally, as the sampling fraction increased from 10% to 90%, the normalized mean BRF deviation of tree library subsampling decreased from -7.4% to -1.3% and its standard deviation decreased from 2.8% to 0.51%.

PUBLICATION RECORD

CITATION MAP

EXTRACTION MAP

CLAIMS

  • No claims are published for this paper.

CONCEPTS

  • No concepts are published for this paper.

REFERENCES

Showing 1-37 of 37 references · Page 1 of 1

CITED BY

Showing 1-16 of 16 citing papers · Page 1 of 1