MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2898837206 · doi:10.4043/29130-ms

Towards Automation of Satellite-Based Radar Imagery for Iceberg Surveillance - Machine Learning of Ship and Iceberg Discrimination

2018· article· en· W2898837206 sur OpenAlex
Desmond Power, Carl Howell, Kelley Dodge, Francesco Scibilia, J.R. Sagli, Richard J. Hall

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

affAu moins un auteur déclare une institution canadienne dans l'instantané OpenAlex épinglé.

Notice bibliographique

RevueOTC Arctic Technology Conference · 2018
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEarth and Planetary Sciences
ThématiqueArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Établissements canadiensCentre For Cold Ocean Resources Engineering
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésIcebergSynthetic aperture radarComputer scienceRemote sensingConstant false alarm rateClutterAutomationSatelliteCloud computingRadarReal-time computingSea iceMeteorologyArtificial intelligenceGeologyEngineeringGeographyTelecommunications

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Drifting icebergs can threaten navigation and marine operations and are prevalent in a number of regions that have active oil and gas exploration and development. Satellite synthetic aperture radar (SAR) is naturally applicable to map and monitor icebergs and sea ice due its ability to capture images day or night, as well as through cloud, fog and various wind conditions. There are several notable examples of its use to support operations, including Grand Banks, Barents Sea, offshore Greenland and Kara Sea. New constellations of satellites and the increasing volume of satellite data becoming available present a new paradigm for ice surveillance, in terms of persistence, reliability and cost. To fully extract the value of the data from these constellations, automation and cloud-based processing must be implemented. This will allow more timely and efficient processing, lowering monitoring costs by at least an order of magnitude. The increase in data persistence and processing capability allows large regions to be monitored daily for ice incursions, thus increasing safety and efficiency during offshore operations in those regions. The process of automating SAR-based iceberg surveillance involves creating a process flow that is robust and requires limited human intervention. The process flow involves land-masking, target detection, target discrimination and product dissemination. Land masking involves the removal of high-clutter land from the imagery to eliminate false detection from these locations. Target detection usually involves an adaptive threshold to separate true targets from the background ocean clutter. A constant false alarm rate (CFAR) is a standard technique used in radar image processing for this purpose. Target discrimination involves an examination of the distinct features of a target to determine if they match the features of icebergs, vessels or other ‘false alarms’ (e.g., marine wildlife, clutter). The final stage is the production of an output surveillance product, which can be a standard iceberg chart (e.g., MANICE) or something that can be ingested into a GIS system (e.g., ESRI shapefile, Google KML). The target discrimination phase is one of the most important phases because it provides feedback to operations about the presence of targets of interest (icebergs and vessels). The authors have used computer vision techniques successfully to train target classifiers. Standard techniques usually result in classifier accuracies of between 85%-95%, depending on the resolution of the SAR (higher resolutions produce more accurate results) and the availability of multiple polarizations. To see if new machine learning techniques could be applied to increase classifier accuracy, a dataset of 5000 ship and iceberg targets were extracted from Sentinel-1 multi-channel data (HH,HV). The images were collected in several regions (Greenland, Grand Banks, and Strait of Gibraltar). Validation either came by way of supporting information from the offshore operations, or was inferred by location. An online machine learning competition was hosted by Kaggle, a company that conducts online competitions on behalf of their clients. The detection data were made available by Kaggle to the broad internet community. Kaggle has a loyal following of data scientists who regularly participate in Kaggle competitions. The competition was hosted over a three-month period; over 3300 teams participated in the competition. The competition produced an improved classifier over standard computer vision techniques; the top three competitors had 4-5 stage classifiers that increased classification accuracy by approximately 5%.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,263
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,536

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,015
Tête enseignante GPT0,231
Écart entre enseignants0,216 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle