Skip to main content

Table 5 Statistical information that describes the relationship between the predicted f from Maestra and that predicted by the stand-level models using Equation 2 or Equation 12

From: Using a stand-level model to predict light absorption in stands with vertically and horizontally heterogeneous canopies

  e% MAE% RMSE Accuracy test
Stand 1 – Equation 2
E. nitens 2.9 12.6 0.0106 20
Stand 2 – Equation 2
E. grandis −16.5 18.9 0.0304 40
A. mangium 5.7 24.8 0.0061 15
Stand total −12.7 16.8 0.0268 40
Stand 3 – Equation 2
A. mangium −0.0 14.2 0.0119 20
H. odorata 2.3 32.6 0.0001 10
Stand total −1.9 13.5 0.0120 20
Stand 4 – Equation 2
C. eyrei −18.8 19.6 0.0010 10
C. sclerophylla −0.3 17.2 0.0149 25
C. lanceolata −11.8 17.2 0.0165 25
C. glauca 9.5 9.5 0.0012 10
L. formosana 16.1 22.2 0.0088 20
Other species 23.3 27.1 0.0009 10
Stand total −6.5 15.4 0.0180 25
Stand 4 – Equation 12
C. eyrei −16.5 16.5 0.0006 10
C. sclerophylla 4.5 23.5 0.0323 35
C. lanceolata −5.8 16.3 0.0204 27
C. glauca 11.0 19.5 0.0033 10
L. formosana 12.5 27.8 0.0212 26
Other species −4.4 24.6 0.0007 10
Stand total −17.3 27.6 0.0831 55
Stand 5 – Equation 2
A. alba −10.5 14.4 0.0082 20
F. sylvatica 27.8 29.6 0.0021 10
P. abies 7.4 16.6 0.0043 15
Stand total −2.1 11.1 0.0128 25
Stand 5 – Equation 12
A. alba −10.0 13.8 0.0069 16
F. sylvatica 52.4 52.4 0.0057 13
P. abies 5.8 18.0 0.0056 14
Stand total 7.1 13.2 0.0162 25
  1. Parameters include the relative average error (average bias, e%, Equation 8), the relative mean absolute error (MAE%, Equation 9), and the mean square error (MSE, Equation 10). The accuracy test shows that predictions from Maestra and those from the stand-level model differed by less than the percent indicated (under Accuracy test) with a 95% confidence limit (Freese [1960]).