Land Use and Cover Mapping with Airborne Hyperspectral Imager in Setiu, Malaysia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years, land use and land cover plays a pivotal role in global environmental change. Under these circumstances,the need of a new dimension for detecting land use and cover is getting more imperative for conservation and effectivemanagement of land use and cover types. Importantly, the use of information technology to support decision making indetecting land use and cover is essential and recent. One of the technologies used is Airborne Remote Sensing. Theobjective of this study is to identify, quantify, classify and map land use and land cover mapping in Setiu, Terengganuusing UPM-APSB’s AISA airborne hyperspectral remote sensing. Detection of land use and cover was performed usingairborne hyperspectral imaging data taken on 20 April 2006 with the support of existing land use and cover maps. Thesize of the study area is 100 ha. The image was displayed in ENVI 4.0 Software using bands 202217 (RGB)combination. The data were then enhanced and classified for different land use and cover classes. From the dataanalysis, the image can be classified into eight classes. The classes are 2-3 years old oil palm plantation, 4-5 years oldoil palm plantation, young (3-4 years old) rubber plantation, matured (15-17 years old) rubber plantation, vegetationcrops, open area, road and river. The land use and land cover classes area distribution of the plots under study in Setiu,Terengganu were 4.18 ha, 8.58 ha, 6.26 ha, 70.43 ha, 2.98 ha, 2.31 ha, 2.78 ha, and 2.48 ha. Overall, the classificationaccuracy of interpretation of the airborne imagery for land use and cover in Setiu, Terengganu is 89.51 and kappacoefficient is 0.86. This study shows that, airborne hyperspectral remote sensing technique is capable in identifying,quantifying, classifying and mapping land use and cover in Setiu, Terengganu, hence a good decision support tool inland use and cover planning and management.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".