ArticleFrontiers in plant science2025
Accuracy assessment of topography and forest canopy height in complex terrain conditions of Southern China using ICESat-2 and GEDI data.
Article in Frontiers in plant science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
ICESat-2 and GEDI offer unique capabilities for terrain and canopy height retrievals; however, their performance and measurement precision are significantly affected by terrain conditions. Furthermore, differences in data scales complicate direct comparisons of their measurement capabilities. This study evaluates the accuracy of terrain and canopy height retrievals from ICESat-2 and GEDI LiDAR data in complex terrain environments. Jinghong City and Pu'er City in Southwest China were selected as study areas, with high-precision airborne LiDAR data serving as a reference. Ground elevation and canopy height retrieval accuracies were compared before and after scale unification to 30 m × 30 m under varying slope conditions. Results indicate that ICESat-2 shows a significant advantage in terrain height retrieval, with RMSE values of 4.75 m and 4.21 m before and after scale unification, respectively. In comparison, GEDI achieved RMSE values of 4.94 m and 4.96 m. Both systems maintain high accuracy in flat regions, but accuracy declines with increasing slope. For canopy height retrieval, GEDI outperforms ICESat-2. Before scale unification, GEDI achieved an R² of 0.73 with an RMSE of 5.15 m, and after scale unification, an R² of 0.67 with an RMSE of 5.32 m. In contrast, ICESat-2 showed lower performance, with an R² of 0.65 and RMSE of 7.42 m before unification, and an R² of 0.53 with RMSE of 8.29 m after unification. GEDI maintains higher canopy height accuracy across all slope levels. Post-scale unification, both systems show high accuracy in ground elevation retrieval, with ICESat-2 being superior. In contrast, GEDI achieves better canopy height retrieval accuracy. These findings highlight the synergistic strengths of ICESat-2's photon-counting and GEDI's full-waveform LiDAR techniques, demonstrating advancements in satellite laser altimetry for terrain and canopy height retrieval.
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.