MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2119128301 · doi:10.1109/igarss.2009.5418243

TerraSAR-X and RADARSAT-2 for crop classification and acreage estimation

2009· article· en· W2119128301 on OpenAlexaffabout
Heather McNairn, Jiali Shang, Catherine Champagne, X. Jiao

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and Techniques
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForageCropDecision treePastureSynthetic aperture radarStatistical classificationData setIdentification (biology)Remote sensingGrowing seasonEnvironmental scienceGeographyMathematicsComputer scienceForestryArtificial intelligenceAgronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research outlines a preliminary assessment of the use of TerraSAR-X data for classifying agricultural crop land in Canada. X-Band data were able to identify crops (pasture-forage, soybeans, corn and wheat) to accuracies of 95% once a post-classification filter was applied. These accuracies were achieved using six TerraSAR-X images from 2008 and a decision-tree classification algorithm. Acquisitions began only mid-season and consequently a second full season TerraSAR-X data set is being collected in 2009. C-Band classification accuracies were about 10% lower in comparison. These results clearly demonstrate the potential of X-Band data for crop identification.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.977
Threshold uncertainty score0.273

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations54
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and TechniquesFrench-language works237,207