Project overview

Estimating the hidden shrub layer of forests from airborne LiDAR, within a fixed computing budget.

Two WildForest3D plots that look alike from above (canopy cover 95% and 88%) but differ from the side: shrubs and small trees give 4.1% and 13.7% of the LiDAR returns.
Two WildForest3D plots that look alike from above (canopy cover 95% and 88%) but differ from the side: shrubs and small trees give 4.1% and 13.7% of the LiDAR returns.

Why the understory matters

A forest fire spreads upward through layers of fuel. Surface fuel (dead leaves, grass and low plants) carries the fire along the ground; shrubs and small trees form a ladder between the ground and the tree crowns. Where that ladder is continuous, a surface fire can climb into the canopy and become a crown fire, which is far harder to control. The height and continuity of the understory are therefore among the most important inputs to fire-behaviour models.

Diagram of three fuel layers: surface fuel, shrubs and small trees, and canopy, with arrows showing fire climbing from one layer to the next Figure 1. Vertical fuel layers. Shrubs and small trees form the ladder between surface fuel and the canopy.

Why it is hard to measure

Maps made from above describe the canopy well and the understory poorly. Two plots with almost the same canopy cover can hold very different amounts of shrub fuel (figure at the top of this page). Airborne LiDAR records 3D points through gaps in the canopy, but fewer pulses reach the lower layers, and the scans are too large to process whole, so 3D pipelines keep only a sample of the points. Common sampling rules keep what was measured best, which removes the sparse understory first.

The same strip of forest as a full ground-based laser scan and as a simulated drone scan; shrub and small-tree returns are dense in the first and almost absent in the second Figure 2. The same 42 m strip of forest from a public ground-based laser scan (LAUTx plot p14, handheld personal laser scanning, from the extended LAUTx scenes) and from a drone scan simulated from it with a simple attenuation model. Returns from shrubs and small trees (shaded band) almost disappear in the simulated scan.

Occlusion: what the sensor could and could not see

The absence of points is not evidence of absence. Space under airborne LiDAR falls into three states: occupied, where a return was recorded; observed empty, where pulses passed through without a return; and unobserved, where no pulse arrived. The project estimates these states from the scan geometry and reports never-observed space as undetermined, not as empty.

Diagram of airborne LiDAR pulses over three trees, marking occupied crowns, observed-empty gaps between crowns and unobserved regions beneath them Figure 3. Occupied, observed empty and unobserved space under airborne LiDAR.

Approach

The method works within a fixed computing budget and spends it where information is missing. Every step is compared with simple methods at the same cost; height-stratified point selection is the main baseline.

  1. Point selection. Keep more points where evidence of the understory is scarce, instead of where the scan is already dense.
  2. Segmentation. Label every point and map the vegetation layers (PointNet++).
  3. Agent. Find regions that remain uncertain and request a second look within the same budget.
  4. Fuel structure. Convert the layer maps into the measures fire models use: understory top height, canopy base height and the ladder gap between them.

Workflow from public data and preprocessing through point selection, segmentation, agent and fuel structure, with evaluation against simple methods and dense ground scans Figure 4. Workflow. Evaluation compares each step with simple methods at the same computing budget, and the fuel estimates with dense ground-based scans.

Data

The project uses public data only; no new field data are collected. UAV LiDAR from WildForest3D provides the main study plots and their reference layer maps. Labelled point clouds, such as FOR-instanceV2, show the ground, wood and leaf classes that segmentation models learn. Dense ground-based scans provide the references: handheld personal laser scanning from LAUTx and terrestrial laser scanning from Wytham Woods. The Datasets page lists every source with its licence.

A forest plot point cloud coloured by class: ground and low plants in light brown, wood in dark brown, leaves and needles in green Figure 5. A FOR-instanceV2 plot (NIBIO2, plot 12) coloured by its reference labels.

Three raster maps of one plot for low plants, shrubs and small trees, and canopy; grey cells carry no label Figure 6. WildForest3D reference layer maps for one plot. Grey cells carry no label and are treated as unknown, not as empty vegetation.

Validation: hide and check

A dense public ground-based scan sees the understory clearly. A drone scan is simulated from it, in which the canopy hides the understory and the pulse directions are known. The system runs on the simulated scan, and its layers, heights and fuel measures are compared layer by layer with the same measures computed from every point of the full scan, including the poorly observed regions.

Validation design: a public ground-based scan feeds a simulated drone scan and the system on one path, and a dense reference on the other, and the two are compared layer by layer Figure 7. Hide-and-check validation. This tests the method under the simulator’s observation model; it does not by itself validate performance on real airborne scans.

Outputs

Three maps of one plot: understory top height, canopy base height, and the ladder gap between them Figure 8. Reference fuel-structure maps from WildForest3D: understory top height, canopy base height and the ladder gap (canopy base minus understory top). Small gaps mark places where fire can climb into the crowns.

Credits

Figures 2, 5, 6, 8 and the figure at the top of this page are drawn from public datasets: WildForest3D, FOR-instanceV2, LAUTx and Wytham Woods. Each dataset’s authors, licence and download link are on the Datasets page.

Objectives

  1. To measure how much of each forest layer survives the data reduction used by current 3D pipelines, and to define a layer-wise way of reporting accuracy.
  2. To develop an occlusion-aware method that estimates the hidden layer more accurately under a fixed computing budget, compared with standard sampling at equal cost.
  3. To validate the estimated structure against ground-based laser scans, and to convert it into the fuel measures fire models use.
  4. To add a reasoning layer that finds poorly measured regions and requests a second look, and to measure its gain over a single pass.