MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2082531791 · doi:10.5589/m07-011

Full fuzzy land cover mapping using remote sensing data based on fuzzy<i>c</i>-means and density estimation

2007· article· en· W2082531791 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Remote Sensing · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRemote-Sensing Image Classification
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFuzzy logicArtificial intelligenceSupport vector machineFuzzy classificationData miningVaguenessPattern recognition (psychology)Computer scienceMathematicsMachine learningFuzzy set

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AbstractThe three stages in supervised digital classification of remote sensing data are training, classification, and testing. The commonly adopted approaches assume that boundaries between classes are crisp and hard classification is applied. In the real world, however, as spatial resolution decreases significantly, the proportion of mixed pixels increases. This leads to vagueness or fuzziness in the data, and in such situations researchers have applied the fuzzy approach at the classification stage. Some researchers have tried fuzzy approaches at the training, classification, and testing stages (full fuzzy concept) using statistical and artificial neural network methods. In this paper a full fuzzy concept has been presented, at a subpixel level, using density estimation using support vector machine (D-SVM) and fuzzy c-means (FCM) approaches. These approaches (SVM and FCM) were evaluated with respect to a fuzzy weighted matrix. In this test study using a four-channel dataset, a comparison of methods has found that a D-SVM function using a Euclidean norm yields the best accuracy.Les trois étapes de la classification numérique dirigée des données de télédétection sont l'entraînement, la classification et la validation. Les approches adoptées généralement supposent que les frontières entre les classes sont nettes et on applique ainsi des classifications dures. Toutefois, dans la réalité, lorsque la résolution spatiale diminue significativement, la proportion de pixels mixtes augmente. Ceci entraîne une imprécision ou un flou dans les données et, dans de tels cas, les chercheurs ont appliqué une approche floue au stade de la classification. Certains chercheurs ont essayé des approches floues aux stades de l'entraînement, de la classification et de la validation (concept flou complet) utilisant des méthodes statistiques et des réseaux de neurones artificiels. Dans cet article, un concept flou complet est présenté, au niveau du sous-pixel, basé sur l'utilisation des approches D-SVM de même que FCM. Ces approches (SVM et FCM) ont été évaluées par rapport à la matrice floue pondérée. Dans cette étude test, basée sur l'utilisation d'un ensemble de données de quatre bandes, une comparaison des méthodes a montré qu'une fonction D-SVM utilisant une norme euclidienne donne la meilleure précision.[Traduit par la Rédaction]

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.870
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.209 · 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