Complex settlement pattern extraction with multi-instance learning
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Per-pixel (or single instance) based classification schemes which have proven to be very useful in thematic classification have shown to be inadequate when it comes to analyzing very high resolution remote sensing imagery. The main problem being that the pixel size (less than a meter) is too small as compared to the typical object size (100s of meters) and contains too little contextual information to accurately distinguish complex settlement types. One way to alleviate this problem is to consider a bigger window or patch/segment consisting a group of adjacent pixels which offers better spatial context than a single pixel. Unfortunately, this makes per-pixel based classification schemes ineffective. In this work, we look at a new class of machine learning approaches, called multi-instance learning, where instead of assigning class labels to individual instances (pixels), a label is assigned to the bag (all pixels in a window or segment). We applied this multi-instance learning approach for identifying two important urban patterns, namely formal and informal settlements. Experimental evaluation shows the better performance of multi-instance learning over several well-known single-instance classification schemes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it