ArticlePloS one2016
Artificial Intelligence Procedures for Tree Taper Estimation within a Complex Vegetation Mosaic in Brazil.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Tree stem form in native tropical forests is very irregular, posing a challenge to establishing taper equations that can accurately predict the diameter at any height along the stem and subsequently merchantable volume. Artificial intelligence approaches can be useful techniques in minimizing estimation errors within complex variations of vegetation. We evaluated the performance of Random Forest® regression tree and Artificial Neural Network procedures in modelling stem taper. Diameters and volume outside bark were compared to a traditional taper-based equation across a tropical Brazilian savanna, a seasonal semi-deciduous forest and a rainforest. Neural network models were found to be more accurate than the traditional taper equation. Random forest showed trends in the residuals from the diameter prediction and provided the least precise and accurate estimations for all forest types. This study provides insights into the superiority of a neural network, which provided advantages regarding the handling of local effects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.