arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2610.06476

Evaluating LiDAR Data Sources, Predictor Resolution, and Spatial Random Effects in Bayesian Change-of-Support Models for Forest Inventory

Arthur Spitta·Andrew O. Finley·Christoph Gollob·Ralf Kraßnitzer·Tim Ritter·Andreas Tockner·Arne Nothdurft
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Forest managers require timely stand-level information for operational planning. Model-based estimation combines sparse field samples with remotely sensed auxiliary data to estimate growing stock volume (GSV) for small-area units. This is particularly relevant in mixed-species and structurally heterogeneous forests, where timely structural information can support management decisions under climate change and associated disturbance pressures. Uncrewed aerial vehicle laser scanning (ULS) provides flexible access to high-resolution LiDAR data, but its benefits over conventional airborne laser scanning (ALS) for model-based inference remain insufficiently understood. We compared public ALS and new ULS data using Bayesian change-of-support models to estimate GSV in a mixed-species forest in north-eastern Germany. We assessed the effects of distributional LiDAR metrics and spatial random effects. ULS models consistently outperformed ALS models, with cross-validated root mean squared prediction errors (RMSPEs) of 68.5 m^3/ha and 79.5 m^3/ha , respectively, a 13.8 % reduction in prediction error. Distributional metrics benefited ULS models more than ALS models, reducing RMSPE by up to 10.1 %, whereas spatial effects yielded minor improvements at greater computational cost. ULS models also exhibited lower stand-level predictive uncertainty for latent stand-mean GSV. This advantage may partly reflect closer temporal alignment with field data and finer-scale predictor information. These findings suggest that timely, information-rich LiDAR data may be more beneficial for stand-level GSV estimation than increasingly complex spatial model structures. ULS is promising where timely acquisition and high-resolution canopy characterization are operationally feasible. Controlled comparisons with temporally matched ALS and ULS data are needed to distinguish platform effects from temporal mismatch.

Explore related subjects

stat.AP

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Arthur Spitta, Andrew O. Finley, Christoph Gollob, Ralf Kraßnitzer, Tim Ritter, Andreas Tockner, Arne Nothdurft. 2026-10-05. Evaluating LiDAR Data Sources, Predictor Resolution, and Spatial Random Effects in Bayesian Change-of-Support Models for Forest Inventory. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.06476

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

DeepAJM: Deep Association Joint Model for Irregularly Sampled data

Joint Models simultaneously model longitudinal and survival outcomes, leveraging patterns in patients' longitudinal trajectory to improve the prediction of survival outcomes. The classical parametric joint models, however, rely on fixed parametric assumptions, making them susceptible to bias under model misspecification and smaller sample sizes. We propose a deep joint model, DeepAJM, that does not require any parametric assumptions, while retaining a partially interpretable, per-longitudinal-outcome association structure. The joint model uses an encoder-decoder (sequence-to-sequence) architecture to learn the latent structure in patients' time-varying covariate trajectories. The model links the longitudinal processes to the survival processes through a learned interpretable association structure, in which each longitudinal output from the decoder gets remodulated by baseline covariates before it contributes to the risk scores from the survival head of the architecture. The model was evaluated on three datasets ( a cardiovascular-disease EHR cohort, a primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC2) dataset, and a simulated dataset) against a classical parametric joint model, TransformerJM, DA-LSTM and a Cox-based survival-only model. All models were assessed using C-index, integrated brier score (IBS), time-dependent AUROC, and time-dependent AUPRC. Our model achieved the best discrimination in terms of the C-index, time-dependent AUROC, and AUPRC across all datasets.

stat.AP↗
arXiv2026

Bayesian Optimization for Dose Finding with Two Agents: Participant Allocation and Final Selection

In two-agent dose-finding trials, the next cohort should help identify a combination for final selection. We studied a constrained knowledge-gradient (cKG) rule with one-cohort lookahead that updates independent Gaussian-process models of efficacy and continuous toxicity, reapplies a probability criterion for mean toxicity, and evaluates the resulting selection. We derived a deterministic calculation over a fixed set of dose combinations, holding fitted model parameters fixed during each hypothetical update. We compared cKG with constrained expected improvement (cEI) and two toxicity-only rules, targeted mean squared error (tMSE) and entropy, in four synthetic scenarios. In the primary obstructive sleep apnea (OSA)-derived scenario, averaged equally over strata and five probability cutoffs, cKG assigned fewer participants to combinations above the true mean-toxicity limit than tMSE (17.92% versus 27.08%), but selected such combinations more often at trial completion (18.80% versus 11.85%). Compared with cEI, cKG had higher mean simulated reduction in the 4%-desaturation apnea-hypopnea index (AHI4) at final selection (7.46 versus 6.72 events/hour), more above-limit final selections (18.80% versus 10.50%), and more above-limit assignments (17.92% versus 15.10%). Across scenarios, its efficacy advantage over cEI was smaller under stricter toxicity criteria. Continuous outcomes, uncalibrated toxicity limits, and a rule that still selects a combination when none meets the criterion limit clinical interpretation. Allocation and final-selection toxicity should be reported separately, alongside efficacy.

stat.AP↗
arXiv2026

A Sensitivity-based Framework for Calibrating Coupled Ordinary Differential Equations under Model Discrepancy

Coupled systems of ordinary differential equations (ODEs) are widely used to model complex physical and biological processes. In these applications, ODE model parameters must be calibrated to field data to enable prediction and parameter inference. In practice, the governing ODEs are an imperfect approximation to the true system, leading to non-negligible model discrepancy that must be incorporated to avoid biased parameter estimates. However, it is well known that highly flexible discrepancy models can confound discrepancy and simulator parameters, leading to poor identifiability. As a result, practitioners often must impose problem-specific prior constraints to adequately regularize the discrepancy, which can be challenging and cumbersome. In this work, we propose a novel calibration framework for coupled, multi-output ODE systems that enforces automatic, model-structural constraints on the discrepancy, improving identifiability without requiring application-specific discrepancy priors. Forward-model gradients are computed via sensitivity equations, solved jointly with the ODE system as a coupled initial value problem. Posterior inference is performed using an adaptive Metropolis-within-Gibbs sampler tailored to the resulting constrained posterior. We demonstrate the approach on three model systems: a mass-spring oscillator, a model of infectious disease spread, and a neuron firing model. We show that our method leads to improved parameter inference and predictive accuracy compared to standard calibration approaches.

stat.AP↗