ARRSI: Automatic Registration of Remote-Sensing Images
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<para xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> This paper presents the Automatic Registration of Remote-Sensing Images (ARRSI); an automatic registration system built to register satellite and aerial remotely sensed images. The system is designed specifically to address the problems associated with the registration of remotely sensed images obtained at different times and/or from different sensors. The ARRSI system is capable of handling remotely sensed images geometrically distorted by various transformations such as translation, rotation, and shear. Global and local contrast issues associated with remotely sensed images are addressed in ARRSI using control-point detection and matching processes based on a phase-congruency model. Intensity-difference issues associated with multimodal registration of remotely sensed images are addressed in ARRSI through the use of features that are invariant to intensity mappings during the control-point matching process. An adaptive control-point matching scheme is employed in ARRSI to reduce the performance issues associated with the registration of large remotely sensed images. Finally, a variation on the Random Sample and Consensus algorithm called Maximum Distance Sample Consensus is introduced in ARRSI to improve the accuracy of the transformation model between two remotely sensed images while minimizing computational overhead. The ARRSI system has been tested using various satellite and aerial remotely sensed images and evaluated based on its accuracy and computational performance. The results indicate that the registration accuracy of ARRSI is comparable to that produced by a human expert and improvement over the baseline and multimodal sum of squared differences registration techniques tested. </para>
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it