MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1485801722

Automatic template-guided classification of remnant trees

2014· dissertation· en· W1485801722 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
P. M. Kennedy

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen ULeth Scholarship (OPUS) (University of Lethbridge) · 2014
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing in Agriculture
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLand coverCover (algebra)WatershedComputer scienceRemote sensingGeographyArtificial intelligenceLand useContextual image classificationForest coverCartographyPattern recognition (psychology)Computer visionImage (mathematics)Engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spectral features within satellite images change so frequently and unpredictably that spectral definitions of land cover are often only accurate for a single image. Consequently, land-cover maps are expensive, because the superior pattern recognition skills of human analysts are required to manually tune spectral definitions of land cover to individual images. To reduce mapping costs, this study developed the Template-Guided Classification (TGC) algorithm, which classifies land cover automatically by reusing class information embedded in freely available large-area land-cover maps. TGC was applied to map remnant forest within six 10-m resolution SPOT images of the Vermilion River watershed in Alberta, Canada. Although the accuracy of the resulting forest maps was low (58% forest user's accuracy and 67% forest producer's accuracy), there were 25% and 8% fewer errors of omission and commission than the original maps, respectively. This improvement would be very useful if it could be obtained automatically over large-areas.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen ULeth Scholarship (OPUS) (University of Lethbridge)Same topicRemote Sensing in AgricultureFrench-language works237,207