Predicting the risk of individual tree fall along powerlines in Norway with a mechanistic wind risk model and machine learning
Abstract. Tree falls along linear infrastructures and in particular powerlines pose a significant economic, safety and environmental challenge for the companies and institutions managing these infrastructures. The quick progression and affordability of remote sensing technologies such as drone-based inventories offers the opportunity to quickly and efficiently map individual trees along these infrastructures, enabling precise vegetation management to reduce risks. Here, we show how the hybrid empirical and mechanistic wind risk model ForestGALES can be applied to assess the vulnerability of individual trees to windfalls along selected powerlines in southern Norway. The validation dataset contained 180 recorded individual tree falls along powerlines from the winter 2020–2021. There was no major wind event recorded that winter. However, still, the ForestGALES model performed adequately, with an AUC (area under the curve) of 0.67. Combining the vulnerability index from ForestGALES with all other available tree and environmental variables in a machine learning model (extreme gradient boost algorithm) did however significantly improve the prediction performance. These results highlight how a combination of high-quality remote sensing data at the individual tree level can be utilized with ForestGALES and machine learning to provide managers with high-resolution vulnerability information for vegetation management.
Dear authors,
Thank you for submitting this interesting manuscript on predicting the risk of individual tree fall along powerlines.
While the current results (in terms of accuracy) may not yet support immediate practical implementation, I believe your work makes a valuable contribution to the ongoing development of methods in this highly relevant field.
You have clearly highlighted and discussed the limitations of your study, which helps clarify the significance of your contribution for fellow researchers.
Overall, the manuscript is well written and well structured. I suggest that you could further improve the Materials and Methods section by including figures that illustrate your approach in greater detail.
Kind regards,