MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023827825 · doi:10.1080/01431160500180699

Deriving terrain and textural information from stereo RADARSAT data for mountainous land cover mapping

2005· article· en· W2023827825 on OpenAlexaff
Xulong Peng, Jinfei Wang, Qiaofeng Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Remote Sensing · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRemote-Sensing Image Classification
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersUniversidad de Buenos Aires
KeywordsTerrainRemote sensingLand coverDigital elevation modelElevation (ballistics)Classifier (UML)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceCartographyGeologyLand useGeographyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new procedure is proposed for land cover classification in a mountainous area using stereo RADARSAT-1 data. The method integrates a few types of information that can be extracted from the same stereo RADARSAT images: (1) the Digital Elevation Model (DEM) generated from the stereo RADARSAT images; (2) terrain information (elevation, slope and aspect) extracted from the derived DEM; and (3) textural information derived from the same RADARSAT images. An Artificial Neural Network (ANN) classifier is applied for the land cover classification. Performance of the proposed method is evaluated using a mountainous study area in Southern Argentina, where there is a lack of up-to-date information for environmental monitoring. The results show that the integration of textural and terrain information can greatly improve the accuracy of the classification using the ANN classifier. It demonstrates that stereo RADARSAT images provide valuable data sources for land cover mapping, especially in mountainous areas where cloud cover is a problem for optical data collection and topographical data are not always available.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations9
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Remote SensingSame topicRemote-Sensing Image ClassificationFrench-language works237,207