MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2137055879 · doi:10.1109/igarss.2008.4779519

Object-Oriented Classification for Change Detection with Different Spatial Resolution Images

2008· article· en· W2137055879 on OpenAlexaff
Yongdae Gweon, Yun Zhang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRemote-Sensing Image Classification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChange detectionComputer scienceAerial imageImage resolutionArtificial intelligenceWavelet transformObject (grammar)Object detectionComputer visionContextual image classificationRemote sensingPattern recognition (psychology)WaveletData miningImage (mathematics)Geography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aerial photos have been increasingly and commonly used in various spatially related applications. Many municipalities and government agencies have constructed aerial photo databases all over the world. Keeping these databases up to date is the most important part of making them effective so that aerial photo databases are expected to be updated as frequently as possible. However, in practice, some of them are barely updated because of high cost. In this study, medium spatial resolution imagery is proposed to detect changes. Instead of using aerial photos, free accessible Landsat ETM+ from GeoBase and orthophotomaps from SODB are used for change detection. In order to compare with different spatial resolution images orthophotomaps are decomposed, segmented, and classified through wavelet transform and object-oriented classification. Although the detected changes are rough, the result shows that the method is quite cost-effective and practical. Moreover, it could support decision making for updating aerial photo databases.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations3
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRemote-Sensing Image ClassificationFrench-language works237,207