https://w3id.org/sciencelive/np/RATzUuXp99cKkSbXG2Eu_G4mQFSY0VMc1Kar0iRCQN1kk/Head https://w3id.org/sciencelive/np/RATzUuXp99cKkSbXG2Eu_G4mQFSY0VMc1Kar0iRCQN1kk http://www.nanopub.org/nschema#hasAssertion https://w3id.org/sciencelive/np/RATzUuXp99cKkSbXG2Eu_G4mQFSY0VMc1Kar0iRCQN1kk/assertion https://w3id.org/sciencelive/np/RATzUuXp99cKkSbXG2Eu_G4mQFSY0VMc1Kar0iRCQN1kk http://www.nanopub.org/nschema#hasProvenance https://w3id.org/sciencelive/np/RATzUuXp99cKkSbXG2Eu_G4mQFSY0VMc1Kar0iRCQN1kk/provenance https://w3id.org/sciencelive/np/RATzUuXp99cKkSbXG2Eu_G4mQFSY0VMc1Kar0iRCQN1kk http://www.nanopub.org/nschema#hasPublicationInfo https://w3id.org/sciencelive/np/RATzUuXp99cKkSbXG2Eu_G4mQFSY0VMc1Kar0iRCQN1kk/pubinfo https://w3id.org/sciencelive/np/RATzUuXp99cKkSbXG2Eu_G4mQFSY0VMc1Kar0iRCQN1kk http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type http://www.nanopub.org/nschema#Nanopublication https://w3id.org/sciencelive/np/RATzUuXp99cKkSbXG2Eu_G4mQFSY0VMc1Kar0iRCQN1kk/assertion https://w3id.org/sciencelive/np/RATzUuXp99cKkSbXG2Eu_G4mQFSY0VMc1Kar0iRCQN1kk/beni-biomass-gedi-forest-height-outcome http://schema.org/endDate 2026-10-03 https://w3id.org/sciencelive/np/RATzUuXp99cKkSbXG2Eu_G4mQFSY0VMc1Kar0iRCQN1kk/beni-biomass-gedi-forest-height-outcome http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type https://w3id.org/sciencelive/o/terms/FORRT-Replication-Outcome https://w3id.org/sciencelive/np/RATzUuXp99cKkSbXG2Eu_G4mQFSY0VMc1Kar0iRCQN1kk/beni-biomass-gedi-forest-height-outcome http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label ESA BIOMASS forest height is lower than GEDI lidar canopy height in most Beni lowland forest, but not in low canopies https://w3id.org/sciencelive/np/RATzUuXp99cKkSbXG2Eu_G4mQFSY0VMc1Kar0iRCQN1kk/beni-biomass-gedi-forest-height-outcome https://w3id.org/sciencelive/o/terms/hasConclusionDescription Partially supported. Across Beni lowland forest, ESA BIOMASS forest height is lower than GEDI lidar canopy height on average (mean difference -3.0 m, 95 percent block-bootstrap interval -4.4 to -1.1 m) and in 78 percent of forest cells, so the claim holds for most of the forest. It does not hold for low canopies: where GEDI canopy height is lowest (median 10.4 m), BIOMASS is on average 2.1 m higher. BIOMASS compresses the height range: the fitted relation crosses the 1:1 line near 24 m of BIOMASS height. The two heights rank forests only moderately consistently. BIOMASS forest height in its first year is therefore usable for the EBV Ecosystem Vertical Profile only with a stated uncertainty of several metres. https://w3id.org/sciencelive/np/RATzUuXp99cKkSbXG2Eu_G4mQFSY0VMc1Kar0iRCQN1kk/beni-biomass-gedi-forest-height-outcome https://w3id.org/sciencelive/o/terms/hasConfidenceLevel https://w3id.org/sciencelive/o/terms/Moderate https://w3id.org/sciencelive/np/RATzUuXp99cKkSbXG2Eu_G4mQFSY0VMc1Kar0iRCQN1kk/beni-biomass-gedi-forest-height-outcome https://w3id.org/sciencelive/o/terms/hasEvidenceDescription Comparison on 1900 forest cells (HEALPix depth 11, WorldCover tree cover at least 50 percent, at least 5 GEDI footprints, at most 5 percent burned in 2024). BIOMASS minus GEDI RH98: mean -3.03 m (95 percent spatial block-bootstrap interval -4.39 to -1.06 m), median -3.83 m, root-mean-square difference 7.18 m; BIOMASS lower in 77.7 percent of cells. Spearman rank correlation 0.58, Pearson 0.52. By thirds of GEDI height (medians 10.4, 19.5, 25.6 m): mean difference +2.1, -4.6, -6.6 m; BIOMASS lower in 48, 87, 97 percent of cells. Linear relation GEDI = 8.61 + 0.645 x BIOMASS, in-sample R2 0.27, cross-validated error 6.59 m (5-fold, 42 spatial blocks). Checks: night-time footprints only, mean difference -2.91 m and Spearman 0.58 (1832 cells); passes combined without the bias weight, mean difference -3.35 m and Spearman 0.59; disagreement against the BIOMASS bias index, Spearman 0.15. Results: results/summary.json. Github repository: https://github.com/annefou/beni-canopy-height-ebv https://w3id.org/sciencelive/np/RATzUuXp99cKkSbXG2Eu_G4mQFSY0VMc1Kar0iRCQN1kk/beni-biomass-gedi-forest-height-outcome https://w3id.org/sciencelive/o/terms/hasLimitationsDescription One region and one BIOMASS season (April to August 2026, Level-2A, processors 4.4.4 and 4.4.5 mixed during reprocessing); the products are early and may change. GEDI footprints span 2019 to 2025, so the two heights are years apart; cells burned in 2024 are excluded but later disturbance is not. GEDI RH98 is a lidar energy percentile over 25 m footprints and BIOMASS forest height is an upper-canopy stand height (H100) from radar at 200 m, so part of the difference is definitional; GEDI is itself a satellite product, and no open field-plot heights exist in the region for an independent check. BIOMASS also reports non-zero heights over grassland, and one of 18 products was excluded for reporting about 30 m over grassland. The breakdown by thirds of GEDI height is affected by regression to the mean. The forest focus group uses a 50 percent tree-cover threshold that is our choice. https://w3id.org/sciencelive/np/RATzUuXp99cKkSbXG2Eu_G4mQFSY0VMc1Kar0iRCQN1kk/beni-biomass-gedi-forest-height-outcome https://w3id.org/sciencelive/o/terms/hasOutcomeRepository https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23120435 https://w3id.org/sciencelive/np/RATzUuXp99cKkSbXG2Eu_G4mQFSY0VMc1Kar0iRCQN1kk/beni-biomass-gedi-forest-height-outcome https://w3id.org/sciencelive/o/terms/hasValidationStatus https://w3id.org/sciencelive/o/terms/PartiallySupported https://w3id.org/sciencelive/np/RATzUuXp99cKkSbXG2Eu_G4mQFSY0VMc1Kar0iRCQN1kk/beni-biomass-gedi-forest-height-outcome https://w3id.org/sciencelive/o/terms/isOutcomeOf https://w3id.org/sciencelive/np/RAcqXoAGeUnb9p0yakR1lohrkZA4wn2ksre3sXvXvQ548 https://w3id.org/sciencelive/np/RATzUuXp99cKkSbXG2Eu_G4mQFSY0VMc1Kar0iRCQN1kk/provenance https://w3id.org/sciencelive/np/RATzUuXp99cKkSbXG2Eu_G4mQFSY0VMc1Kar0iRCQN1kk/assertion http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#wasAttributedTo https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1784-2920 https://w3id.org/sciencelive/np/RATzUuXp99cKkSbXG2Eu_G4mQFSY0VMc1Kar0iRCQN1kk/pubinfo https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1784-2920 http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name Anne Fouilloux https://w3id.org/sciencelive/np/RATzUuXp99cKkSbXG2Eu_G4mQFSY0VMc1Kar0iRCQN1kk http://purl.org/dc/terms/created 2026-10-03T12:07:44.249Z https://w3id.org/sciencelive/np/RATzUuXp99cKkSbXG2Eu_G4mQFSY0VMc1Kar0iRCQN1kk http://purl.org/dc/terms/creator https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1784-2920 https://w3id.org/sciencelive/np/RATzUuXp99cKkSbXG2Eu_G4mQFSY0VMc1Kar0iRCQN1kk http://purl.org/dc/terms/license https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ https://w3id.org/sciencelive/np/RATzUuXp99cKkSbXG2Eu_G4mQFSY0VMc1Kar0iRCQN1kk http://purl.org/nanopub/x/introduces https://w3id.org/sciencelive/np/RATzUuXp99cKkSbXG2Eu_G4mQFSY0VMc1Kar0iRCQN1kk/beni-biomass-gedi-forest-height-outcome https://w3id.org/sciencelive/np/RATzUuXp99cKkSbXG2Eu_G4mQFSY0VMc1Kar0iRCQN1kk http://purl.org/nanopub/x/wasCreatedAt https://platform.sciencelive4all.org https://w3id.org/sciencelive/np/RATzUuXp99cKkSbXG2Eu_G4mQFSY0VMc1Kar0iRCQN1kk http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label ESA BIOMASS forest height is lower than GEDI lidar canopy height in most Beni lowland forest, but not in low canopies https://w3id.org/sciencelive/np/RATzUuXp99cKkSbXG2Eu_G4mQFSY0VMc1Kar0iRCQN1kk https://w3id.org/np/o/ntemplate/wasCreatedFromTemplate https://w3id.org/np/RA2zljn0Nw9SadppOyxZoh-_Rxosslrq-vYG-p9SttnJE https://w3id.org/sciencelive/np/RATzUuXp99cKkSbXG2Eu_G4mQFSY0VMc1Kar0iRCQN1kk/sig http://purl.org/nanopub/x/hasAlgorithm RSA https://w3id.org/sciencelive/np/RATzUuXp99cKkSbXG2Eu_G4mQFSY0VMc1Kar0iRCQN1kk/sig http://purl.org/nanopub/x/hasPublicKey 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 https://w3id.org/sciencelive/np/RATzUuXp99cKkSbXG2Eu_G4mQFSY0VMc1Kar0iRCQN1kk/sig http://purl.org/nanopub/x/hasSignature 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 https://w3id.org/sciencelive/np/RATzUuXp99cKkSbXG2Eu_G4mQFSY0VMc1Kar0iRCQN1kk/sig http://purl.org/nanopub/x/hasSignatureTarget https://w3id.org/sciencelive/np/RATzUuXp99cKkSbXG2Eu_G4mQFSY0VMc1Kar0iRCQN1kk https://w3id.org/sciencelive/np/RATzUuXp99cKkSbXG2Eu_G4mQFSY0VMc1Kar0iRCQN1kk/sig http://purl.org/nanopub/x/signedBy https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1784-2920