MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1521437980 · doi:10.1109/acssc.1999.831903

Hierarchical ship classifier for airborne synthetic aperture radar (SAR) images

2003· article· en· W1521437980 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTarget Tracking and Data Fusion in Sensor Networks
Canadian institutionsLockheed Martin (Canada)
FundersMichael and Susan Dell Foundation
KeywordsSynthetic aperture radarClassifier (UML)Artificial intelligenceTestbedComputer scienceComputer visionRadarSensor fusionAutomatic target recognitionCombatantInverse synthetic aperture radarRadar imagingEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lockheed Martin Canada has developed an agent-based adaptable data fusion testbed (ADFT) within the knowledge based system (KBS) architecture which is currently made of a multi-sensor data fusion (MSDF) module and an image support module (ISM). The MSDF module fuses the information provided by nonimaging (2D-radar, ESM) sensors and the various propositions provided by the ISM when processing a synthetic aperture radar (SAR) image. Currently, the ISM processes, simulated and/or real images of ships through a four-step hierarchical classifier that can extract attributes such as ship length, ship category, ship type and ship class. The SAR classifier can distinguish between merchant and combatant categories and can select amongst 5 combatant types. Tests on simulated and real SAR images show a good recognition rate up to the ship type for merchant and line ships.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.823
Threshold uncertainty score0.622

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.227 · 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