Full text: Proceedings of the international symposium on remote sensing for observation and inventory of earth resources and the endangered environment (Volume 3)

  
  
  
  
  
  
    
  
  
   
  
   
  
  
  
  
  
   
   
  
  
  
  
     
— 
Meters 
ors 
go 
€ 
2 
© 
2 
> 
w 
504 
N d ^ P J T 
Vv T N N a4 N ^N f, photo 
P Xu b^ El Cer" M v^] (Nw Na N vu 
\ | wv v 
wr | i 7 M \ 
M | Ld xd LA gum 
ov x us SEE ren iD mE, ur NA xd ud Y rade 
photo 
50+ 
-100 
  
  
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 
Horizonta! distance (m) 
FIGURE 6. Ground and tree canopy profiles generated photogrammetrically 
and by the radar altimeter. Vertical lines represent spot checks 
of tree height. 
during the radar altimeter tests showed particular promise to the local scientific 
personnel and prompted us to examine their potential. To do so, the following limited 
test was conducted. 
A map of part of one of the 200 by 200 m plots was available with every tree 
mapped in position and containing species codes and diameter information. Seventy- 
three of these trees representing 12 species could positively be identified on the large- 
scale photos. One of each species was selected for a preliminary test to act as a 
standard for training, reference and coding purposes and to screen the following photo 
coverage: 70 mm black and white 4X enlargements (scale about 1:500), 70 mm colour 
contact prints (scale about 1:2000), 230 mm black and white contact prints (scale about 
1:2700) and 230 mm colour contact prints (scale about 1:2400). The remaining trees were 
withheld for evaluating the accuracy of the species identification. 
The main test was carried out using the 4X black and white enlargements 
agreed upon as "best" by the three interpreters. The interpretation results were plotted 
in the commonly used "confusion matrix" to analyze the species identification accuracy. 
Results 
There remained no doubt that the altimeter's signal did penetrate the foliage 
and that the profiles obtained were indeed those of the terrain. After the first flights 
over line 1 and comparisons of radar traces with the surveyed profiles, a significant and 
consistent discrepancy was noted. A field check of the surveyed line revealed a 4.2 m 
error in the field survey. After correction, the profiles matched very well (Figure 3). 
The extreme deviations are in the order of 5 m, the standard deviation of the differences
	        
Waiting...

Note to user

Dear user,

In response to current developments in the web technology used by the Goobi viewer, the software no longer supports your browser.

Please use one of the following browsers to display this page correctly.

Thank you.