MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1988627994 · doi:10.1117/12.799232

Improved iterative error analysis for endmember extraction from hyperspectral imagery

2008· article· en· W1988627994 on OpenAlexaff
Lixin Sun, Ying Zhang, B. Guindon

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRemote-Sensing Image Classification
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEndmemberHyperspectral imagingPixelPattern recognition (psychology)Computer scienceAbundance estimationArtificial intelligenceConstraint (computer-aided design)Image (mathematics)Feature extractionSet (abstract data type)AlgorithmMathematicsAbundance (ecology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Automated image endmember extraction from hyperspectral imagery is a challenge and a critical step in spectral mixture analysis (SMA). Over the past years, great efforts were made and a large number of algorithms have been proposed to address this issue. Iterative error analysis (IEA) is one of the well-known existing endmember extraction methods. IEA identifies pixel spectra as a number of image endmembers by an iterative process. In each of the iterations, a fully constrained (abundance nonnegativity and abundance sum-to-one constraints) spectral unmixing based on previously identified endmembers is performed to model all image pixels. The pixel spectrum with the largest residual error is then selected as a new image endmember. This paper proposes an updated version of IEA by making improvements on three aspects of the method. First, fully constrained spectral unmixing is replaced by a weakly constrained (abundance nonnegativity and abundance sum-less-or-equal-to-one constraints) alternative. This is necessary due to the fact that only a subset of endmembers exhibit in a hyperspectral image have been extracted up to an intermediate iteration and the abundance sum-to-one constraint is invalid at the moment. Second, the search strategy for achieving an optimal set of image endmembers is changed from sequential forward selection (SFS) to sequential forward floating selection (SFFS) to reduce the so-called "nesting effect" in resultant set of endmembers. Third, a pixel spectrum is identified as a new image endmember depending on both its spectral extremity in the feature hyperspace of a dataset and its capacity to characterize other mixed pixels. This is achieved by evaluating a set of extracted endmembers using a criterion function, which is consisted of the mean and standard deviation of residual error image. Preliminary comparison between the image endmembers extracted using improved and original IEA are conducted based on an airborne visible infrared imaging spectrometer (AVIRIS) dataset acquired over Cuprite mining district, Nevada, USA.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.225 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations8
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicRemote-Sensing Image ClassificationFrench-language works237,207