Hyperspectral Image Classification With Limited Labeled Training Samples Using Enhanced Ensemble Learning and Conditional Random Fields
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
Classification of hyperspectral imagery using few labeled samples is a challenging problem, considering the high dimensionality of hyperspectral imagery. Classifiers trained on limited samples with abundant spectral bands tend to overfit, leading to weak generalization capability. To address this problem, we have developed an enhanced ensemble method called multiclass boosted rotation forest (MBRF), which combines the rotation forest algorithm and a multiclass AdaBoost algorithm. The benefit of this combination can be explained by bias-variance analysis, especially in the situation of inadequate training samples and high dimensionality. Furthermore, MBRF innately produces posterior probabilities inherited from AdaBoost, which are served as the unary potentials of the conditional random field (CRF) model to incorporate spatial context information. Experimental results show that the classification accuracy by MBRF as well as its integration with CRF consistently outperforms the other referenced state-of-the-art classification methods when limited labeled samples are available for training.
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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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