English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Diameter distribution is used in most forest management planning packages for predicting stand volume, timber volume and stand growth. The prediction of diameter distribution can be based on parametric distribution functions, distribution-free parametric prediction methods or purely non-parametric methods. In the fi rst case, the distribution is obtained by predicting the parameters of some probability density function. In a distribution-free percentile method, the diameters at certain percentiles of the distribution are predicted with models. In non-parametric methods, the predicted distribution is a linear combination of similar measured stands. In this study, the percentile based diameter distribution is compared to the results obtained with the Weibull method in four independent data sets. In the case of Scots pine, the other methods are also compared to k-nearest neighbour method. The comparison was made with respect to the accuracy of predicted stand volume, saw timber volume and number of stems. The predicted percentile and Weibull distributions were calibrated using number of stems measured from the stand. The information of minimum and maximum diameters were also used, for re-scaling the percentile based distribution or for parameter recovery of Weibull parameters. The accuracy of the predicted stand characteristics were also compared for calibrated distributions. The most reliable results were obtained using the percentile method with the model set including number of stems as a predictor. Calibration improved the results in most cases. However, using the minimum and maximum diameters for parameter recovery proved to be ineffi cient.

Performance of percentile based diameter distribution prediction and Weibull method in independent data sets