| |
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
|
- 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]).
