MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1979393858 · doi:10.1109/icif.2007.4407991

Comparing several AFE tools in the context of ships and vehicles detection based on RGB and EO data

2007· article· en· W1979393858 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.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRemote-Sensing Image Classification
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Computer scienceFeature (linguistics)RGB color modelFalse alarmNational laboratoryMachine learningArtificial intelligenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we present a comparison of three AFE tools used in the context of ship and vehicle detection based on high resolution data. The three tools (Genie Pro - Los Alamos National Laboratory, Feature Analyst - Visual Learning Systems and eCognition - Definiens AG) were chosen because they were defined as promising and were to be analyzed by NGA in the framework of the STAR program. The comparison is presented here in terms of detection and false alarm rates and also in terms of pros and cons of each tool.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.722
Threshold uncertainty score0.192

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.172 · 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

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRemote-Sensing Image ClassificationFrench-language works237,207