MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052694701 · doi:10.1063/1.3573633

Multichannel SAR Image Classification by Finite Mixtures, Copula Theory and Markov Random Fields

2011· article· en· W2052694701 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Vladimir A. Krylov, Gabriele Moser, Sebastiano B. Serpico, Josiane Zerubia, Ali Mohammad‐Djafari, Jean‐François Bercher, Pierre Bessìère

Bibliographic record

VenueAIP conference proceedings · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Methods and Mixture Models
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Space AgencyUniversità degli Studi di GenovaInstitut national de recherche en informatique et en automatique (INRIA)
KeywordsSynthetic aperture radarMarkov random fieldPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceContextual image classificationComputer scienceCopula (linguistics)Radar imagingProbability density functionBayesian probabilityRandom fieldMarkov processMarkov chainMathematicsRadarMachine learningImage segmentationImage (mathematics)Statistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we develop a supervised classification approach for medium and high resolution multichannel synthetic aperture radar (SAR) amplitude images. The proposed technique combines finite mixture modeling for probability density function estimation, copulas for multivariate distribution modeling and a Markov random field (MRF) approach to Bayesian classification. The novelty of this research is in introduction of copulas to classification of D‐channel SAR, with D⩽3, within the mainframe of finite mixtures—MRF approach. This generalization results in a flexible and well performing multichannel SAR classification technique. Its accuracy is validated on several multichannel Quad‐pol RADARSAT‐2 images and compared to benchmark classification techniques.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIP conference proceedingsSame topicBayesian Methods and Mixture ModelsFrench-language works237,207