MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1990304459 · doi:10.1109/jstars.2012.2217940

Evaluating SAR Sea Ice Image Segmentation Using Edge-Preserving Region-Based MRFs

2012· article· en· W1990304459 on OpenAlexaff
Xuezhi Yang, David A. Clausi

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSynthetic aperture radarArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceImage segmentationSegmentationSpeckle noisePattern recognition (psychology)Computer visionSpeckle patternRadar imagingFeature extractionRemote sensingGeologyRadar

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a new approach to sea ice segmentation in synthetic aperture radar (SAR) intensity images by combining an edge-preserving region (EPR)-based representation with region-level MRF models. To construct the EPR-based representation of a SAR image, edge strength is measured using instantaneous coefficient of variation (ICOV) upon which the watershed algorithm is applied to partition the image into primitive regions. In addition, two new metrics for quantitative assessment of region characteristics (region accuracy and region redundancy) are defined and used for parameter estimation in the ICOV extraction process towards desired region characteristics. In combination with a region-level MRF, the EPR-based representation facilitates the segmentation process by largely reducing the search space of optimization process and improving parameter estimation of feature model, leading to considerable computational savings and less probability of false segmentation. The proposed segmentation method has been evaluated using a synthetic sea ice image corrupted with varying levels of speckle noise as well as real SAR sea ice images. Relative to the existing region-level MRF-based methods, testing results have demonstrated that our proposed method substantially improves the segmentation accuracy at high speckle noise and achieves on average 29% reduction of computational time.

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 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)0.001
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 score0.714
Threshold uncertainty score0.547

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.286
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 teacher head, 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

Citations24
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote SensingSame topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamicsFrench-language works237,207