Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2018 Apr 4.
Published in final edited form as: Remote Sens (Basel). 2016 Apr 14;8(4):327. doi: 10.3390/rs8040327

Table 2.

Modeling statistics for mean and H100 model comparison between field data and remote sensing approaches at each subplot. Model efficiencies were compared between field and remote sensing values of the mean and H100, respectively. For Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM) and TanDEM-X (TDX) Canopy Height Models (CHMs), H100 estimates were used in both the field-derived mean and H100 values.

Field Reference

VHR SRTM TDX Lidar

Mean H100 Mean H100 Mean H100 Mean H100
R2 0.73 0.57 0.69 0.57 0.70 0.57 0.71 0.59
RMSE 3.97 4.30 2.52 3.87 5.78 6.11 3.41 6.40
MAPE 0.24 0.28 0.20 0.24 0.49 0.48 0.23 0.46
NSE −0.19 0.31 0.55 0.46 −1.45 −0.40 0.25 −0.39
Bias −1.83 −1.33 0.15 1.69 −3.31 −3.52 −1.84 −4.80

R2= coefficient of determination; RMSE = Root Mean Square Error; MAPE = Mean Absolute Percent Error; NSE = Nash–Sutcliffe Efficiency Index.