MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1496969825 · doi:10.1109/igarss.2004.1370740

Detecting information under and from shadow in panchromatic Ikonos images of the city of Sherbrooke

2004· article· en· W1496969825 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Dong-Chen He Amani Massalabi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVideo Surveillance and Tracking Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPanchromatic filmShadow (psychology)Shadow mappingZenithComputer visionSpecular reflectionPosition (finance)Computer scienceGeologyArtificial intelligenceGeographyRemote sensingImage resolutionPhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The presence of shadow is increasingly alarming on the images with very high spatial resolution mainly in urban area. After shadow detection, how to give an added value to detected shadow? Some kinds of exploitation are presented: the restitution of information under shadow and the deduction of object height from their shadow. The restitution of surfaces under shadow is based on the analysis of contextual and textural information between the shadow and its neighbouring surfaces not in sun side. Assuming that the same surface texture is independent of shadow. The height of objects is deduced knowing the length of their projected shadow on the ground, the position (azimuth and zenith) of the sun and the sensor at the time of acquisition. These exploitations of shadow were carried out on a panchromatic Ikonos image of Sherbrooke. Results are validated with land use map for surfaces under shadow, and measured height for the building height from shadow.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.900
Threshold uncertainty score0.199

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations31
Published2004
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVideo Surveillance and Tracking MethodsFrench-language works237,207