MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987482109 · doi:10.1190/1.2356114

Texture-based classification of ground-penetrating radar images

2006· article· en· W1987482109 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysics · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeophysical Methods and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGround-penetrating radarArtificial intelligenceRadarComputer scienceFourier transformPattern recognition (psychology)Radar imagingCovarianceClassifier (UML)FaciesGeologyRemote sensingMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Image texture is one of the key features used for the interpretation of radar facies in ground-penetrating radar (GPR) data. Establishing quantitative measures of texture is therefore a critical step in the effective development of advanced techniques for the interpretation of GPR images. This study presents the first effort to evaluate whether different measures of a GPR image capture the features of the data that, when coupled with a neural network classifier, are able to reproduce a human interpretation. The measures compared in this study are instantaneous amplitude and frequency, as well as the variance, covariance, Fourier-Mellin transform, R-transform, and principle components (PCs) determined for a window of radar data. A 50-MHz GPR section collected over the William River delta in Saskatchewan, Canada, is used for the analysis. We found that measures describing the local spatial structure of the GPR image (i.e., covariance, Fourier-Mellin, R-transform, and PCs) were able to reproduce human interpretations with greater than 93% accuracy. In contrast, classifications based on image variance and the instantaneous attributes agreed with the human interpretation less than 68% of the time. Among the textural measures that preserve spatial structure, we found that the best ones are insensitive to within facies variability while emphasizing differences between facies. For the specific case of the William River delta, the Fourier-Mellin transform, which retains information about the spatial correlation of reflections while remaining insensitive to their orientation, outperformed the other measures. Our work in describing radar texture provides an important first step in defining quantitative criteria that can be used to aid in the classification of radar data.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.864
Threshold uncertainty score0.436

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.221 · 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