
handle: 10174/36123
Models are abstractions that enable to assess and predict forest stands variables. Two broad methods to estimate biomass were defined. The direct method, the most accurate, has the disadvantage of resulting from destructive sampling. Inversely, the indirect method uses a variety of mathematical methods, with forest inventory, remote sensing, and ancillary data as explanatory variables. The accuracy of the biomass models is dependent on data acquisition precision and accuracy as well as on the model’s uncertainties. Moreover, model accuracy is also dependent on species, individual tree biomass partitioning, stand structure, region, and spatial and temporal scales. This chapter overviews the data sets and mathematical methods used for modelling biomass and their uncertainties. Overall, the performance of the forest biomass functions is linked to its ability to accommodate the variability inherent to forest data and to make biomass assessments, monitoring, and predictions with the best possible precision and accuracy and the smallest bias.
Data sets, Remote sensing, Uncertainties, Regression, Forest inventory
Data sets, Remote sensing, Uncertainties, Regression, Forest inventory
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
