MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1974665144 · doi:10.1109/whispers.2009.5288999

Onboard SVM analysis of Hyperion data to detect sulfur deposits in Arctic regions

2009· article· en· W1974665144 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lukas Mandrake, Kiri L. Wagstaff, Damhnait Gleeson, Umaa Rebbapragada, Daniel Tran, Rebecca Castaño, Steven Chien, R. T. Pappalardo

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupport vector machineComputer scienceSpacecraftClassifier (UML)Remote sensingArcticArtificial intelligenceLandformGeologyEngineeringGeographyCartographyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Onboard classification of remote sensing data can permit autonomous, intelligent scheduling decisions without ground interaction. In this study, we observe the sulfur-rich Borup-Fiord glacial springs in Canada with the Hyperion instrument aboard the EO-1 spacecraft. This system offers an analog to far more exotic locales such as Europa where remote sensing of biogenic indicators is of considerable interest. Previous work has been performed in the generation and execution of an onboard SVM (support vector machine) classifier to autonomously identify the presence of sulfur compounds associated with the activity of microbial life. However, those results were severely limited in the number of positive examples available to be labeled. In this paper we extend the sample size from 1 to 7 example scenes between 2006 and 2008, corresponding to a change from 18 to 235 positive labels. We also explore nonlinear SVM kernels as an extension of our onboard capability.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry Studies→French-language works237,207→