MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2043755928 · doi:10.1117/12.2016135

Undercomplete learned dictionaries for land cover classification in multispectral imagery of Arctic landscapes using CoSA: clustering of sparse approximations

2013· article· en· W2043755928 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Daniela I. Moody, Steven P. Brumby, J. C. Rowland, Chandana Gangodagamage

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRemote-Sensing Image Classification
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsComputer scienceMultispectral imageLand coverCluster analysisArtificial intelligenceField (mathematics)Remote sensingFeature (linguistics)Feature extractionPattern recognition (psychology)Machine learningLand useGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Techniques for automated feature extraction, including neuroscience-inspired machine vision, are of great interest for landscape characterization and change detection in support of global climate change science and modeling. We present results from an ongoing effort to extend machine vision methodologies to the environmental sciences, using state-of-theart adaptive signal processing, combined with compressive sensing and machine learning techniques. We use a Hebbian learning rule to build undercomplete spectral-textural dictionaries that are adapted to the data. We learn our dictionaries from millions of overlapping multispectral image patches and then use a pursuit search to generate classification features. Land cover labels are automatically generated using our CoSA algorithm: unsupervised Clustering of Sparse Approximations. We demonstrate our method using multispectral Worldview-2 data from three Arctic study areas: Barrow, Alaska; the Selawik River, Alaska; and a watershed near the Mackenzie River delta in northwest Canada. Our goal is to develop a robust classification methodology that will allow for the automated discretization of the landscape into distinct units based on attributes such as vegetation, surface hydrological properties, and geomorphic characteristics. To interpret and assign land cover categories to the clusters we both evaluate the spectral properties of the clusters and compare the clusters to both field- and remote sensing-derived classifications of landscape attributes. Our work suggests that neuroscience-based models are a promising approach to practical pattern recognition problems in remote sensing.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.213 · 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
Published2013
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