MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2083594659 · doi:10.1145/2337542.2337562

Surface Sulfur Detection via Remote Sensing and Onboard Classification

2012· article· en· W2083594659 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lukas Mandrake, Umaa Rebbapragada, Kiri L. Wagstaff, David R. Thompson, Steve Chien, Daniel Tran, R. T. Pappalardo, Damhnait Gleeson, Rebecca Castaño

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsComputer scienceOrbiterRemote sensingSulfurFeature (linguistics)Artificial intelligenceGeologyMaterials scienceAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Orbital remote sensing provides a powerful way to efficiently survey targets such as the Earth and other planets and moons for features of interest. One such feature of astrobiological relevance is the presence of surface sulfur deposits. These deposits have been observed to be associated with microbial activity at the Borup Fiord glacial springs in Canada, a location that may provide an analogue to other icy environments such as Europa. This article evaluates automated classifiers for detecting sulfur in remote sensing observations by the hyperion spectrometer on the EO-1 spacecraft. We determined that a data-driven machine learning solution was needed because the sulfur could not be detected by simply matching observations to sulfur lab spectra. We also evaluated several methods (manual and automated) for identifying the most relevant attributes (spectral wavelengths) needed for successful sulfur detection. Our findings include (1) the Borup Fiord sulfur deposits were best modeled as containing two sub-populations: sulfur on ice and sulfur on rock; (2) as expected, classifiers using Gaussian kernels outperformed those based on linear kernels, and should be adopted when onboard computational constraints permit; and (3) Recursive Feature Elimination selected sensible and effective features for use in the computationally constrained environment onboard EO-1. This study helped guide the selection of algorithm parameters and configuration for the classification system currently operational on EO-1. Finally, we discuss implications for a similar onboard classification system for a future Europa orbiter.

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)0.002
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.208 · 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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and TechnologySame topicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas DynamicsFrench-language works237,207