Keyser, C. E., & Dixon, G. E. (2008). Blue Mountains (BM) variant overview—Forest vegetation simulator. Internal Rep., Fort Collins, CO: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Management Service Center. (revised February 3, 2010)

has been cited by the following article:

• TITLE: A Comparison of Selected Parametric and Non-Parametric Imputation Methods for Estimating Forest Biomass and Basal Area

  AUTHORS: Donald Gagliasso, Susan Hummel, Hailemariam Temesgen

  KEYWORDS: Gradient Nearest Neighbor; Most Similar Neighbor; K-Nearest Neighbor; Random Forest; Geographic Weighted Regression; Biomass; LiDAR

  JOURNAL NAME: Open Journal of Forestry, Vol.4 No.1, January 13, 2014

  ABSTRACT: Various methods have been used to estimate the amount of above ground forest biomass across landscapes and to create biomass maps for specific stands or pixels across ownership or project areas. Without an accurate estimation method, land managers might end up with incorrect biomass estimate maps, which could lead them to make poorer decisions in their future management plans. The goal of this study was to compare various imputation methods to predict forest biomass and basal area, at a project planning scale (a combination of ground inventory plots, light detection and ranging (LiDAR) data, satellite imagery, and climate data was analyzed, and their root mean square error (RMSE) and bias were calculated. Results indicate that for biomass prediction, the k-nn (k = 5) had the lowest RMSE and least amount of bias. The second most accurate method consisted of the k-nn (k = 3), followed by the GWR model, and the random forest imputation. For basal area prediction, the GWR model had the lowest RMSE and least amount of bias. The second most accurate method was k-nn (k = 5), followed by k-nn (k = 3), and the random forest method. For both metrics, the GNN method was the least accurate based on the ranking of RMSE and bias.