MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987785235 · doi:10.1109/lgrs.2015.2487226

Feature Extraction for Hyperspectral Imagery via Ensemble Localized Manifold Learning

2015· article· en· W1987785235 on OpenAlexafffund
Fan Li, Linlin Xu, Alexander Wong, David A. Clausi

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRemote-Sensing Image Classification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersCanadian Space AgencyNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsHyperspectral imagingFeature extractionPattern recognition (psychology)Nonlinear dimensionality reductionArtificial intelligenceManifold (fluid mechanics)Computer scienceManifold alignmentClassifier (UML)Feature vectorFeature (linguistics)Dimensionality reduction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A feature extraction approach for hyperspectral image classification has been developed. Multiple linear manifolds are learned to characterize the original data based on their locations in the feature space, and an ensemble of classifier is then trained using all these manifolds. Such manifolds are localized in the feature space (which we will refer to as “localized manifolds”) and can overcome the difficulty of learning a single global manifold due to the complexity and nonlinearity of hyperspectral data. Two state-of-the-art feature extraction methods are used to implement localized manifolds. Experimental results show that classification accuracy is improved using both localized manifold learning methods on standard hyperspectral data sets.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations14
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing LettersSame topicRemote-Sensing Image ClassificationFrench-language works237,207