MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100717729 · doi:10.1109/igarss.2006.292

Sensitivity of Spectral Unmixing Analysis to a Spectrally Dependent Gain Error in Hyperspectral Data

2006· article· en· W2100717729 on OpenAlexaff
Raymond Soffer, R. A. Neville, K. Staenz, H. Peter White

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRemote-Sensing Image Classification
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHyperspectral imagingMODTRANRemote sensingRadianceSensitivity (control systems)Full spectral imagingCalibrationSpectral sensitivityRadiometric calibrationAtmospheric correctionComputer scienceMathematicsReflectivityOpticsStatisticsGeologyPhysicsWavelength

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In support of phase a work on the proposed hyperspectral environment and resource observer (HERO) mission, the sensitivity of the results obtained from a common hyperspectral analysis technique, linear spectral unmixing, to a spectrally dependent error in the radiometric calibration of the hyperspectral data is investigated. Two ground-based mineral reflectance spectra are selected as spectral endmembers and combined linearly to give five different mixtures. The MODTRAN atmospheric correction model, as implemented in the imaging spectrometer data analysis system (ISDAS), is used to convert these ground-based reflectance spectra to top-of- atmosphere (TOA) radiance. The resulting mixed spectra are then subjected to a randomly generated spectral gain error (SGE). This is repeated a statistically significant number of times to produce a simulated dataset for each of the five mineral combinations. By varying the magnitude of the introduced SGE, several simulated datasets are produced representing different levels of relative calibration accuracies in the spectral domain. The simulated TOA data sets are then converted back to ground-based reflectance, once again using MODTRAN. Linear constrained spectral unmixing is then applied to each of the simulated datasets. Each of the original mixtures results in a distribution of fractions, the width of which is dependent on the magnitude of the SGE applied to the data set providing the relationship between the unmixing error and the SGE. A specification of the acceptable error in the unmixing results then dictates the required level of accuracy in the spectral gain calibration. The relationship between the SGE and the error in the unmixing results is shown to be directly proportional.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations4
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRemote-Sensing Image ClassificationFrench-language works237,207