2013
DOI: 10.1002/sys.21275
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Systems Engineering Approach to Estimating Uncertainty in Above‐Ground Biomass (AGB) Derived from Remote‐Sensing Data

Abstract: We integrate systems of measurement and modeling to improve estimation of uncertainties in aboveground biomass (AGB) derived from remote sensing. The outcome provides a unified starting point for the climate-change carbon community to assess uncertainty and sensitivity data and methodologies, and ultimately supports decision-making about which missions and instruments to develop for a desired cost/benefit ratio. Initial results include fusion of remote-sensing techniques (e.g., radar and lidar), uncertainties … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

4
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This analysis accounted for spatial autocorrelation of the AGB error at the pixel scale using the techniques described by McRoberts [] and Weisbin et al . [] (details are provided in the supporting information). As the biomass consumption estimate is the difference between two correlated AGB estimates, its variance was estimated following McRoberts et al .…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…This analysis accounted for spatial autocorrelation of the AGB error at the pixel scale using the techniques described by McRoberts [] and Weisbin et al . [] (details are provided in the supporting information). As the biomass consumption estimate is the difference between two correlated AGB estimates, its variance was estimated following McRoberts et al .…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…This process included the quantification of error at each step of the process and the use of the Gaussian error propagation approach:where each of the terms are the relative errors at that pixel and represent the measurement errors of lidar for capturing the forest height, the error associated with the lidar aboveground C allometry model for each forest type, the error associated with sampling the 1-ha pixel with GLAS footprint size (~0.25 ha), and the MaxEnt prediction error. In evaluating the errors at the state and county level, we also included the spatial correlation of the prediction error from the MaxEnt approach [24]. …”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…where AGB An uncertainty analysis of the AGB 2012 and AGB 2014 at landscape level for each pulse density target and DTM scenario was also performed by integrating the pixel level errors and accounting for spatial autocorrelation of the errors as follows [27][28][29]:…”
Section: Aboveground Biomass Change Estimation and Mappingmentioning
confidence: 99%