MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2142547355 · doi:10.1109/igarss.2006.454

Classification of Polarimetric SAR Data Using Spectral Graph Partitioning

2006· article· en· W2142547355 on OpenAlexafffund
Kaan Ersahin, I. Cumming, M. Yedlin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Space Agency
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceSegmentationSynthetic aperture radarPattern recognition (psychology)HistogramClassifier (UML)Wishart distributionImage segmentationGraph partitionPolarimetryGraphContextual image classificationRadar imagingComputer visionRadarMachine learningImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new approach for classification of Polarimetric Synthetic Aperture Radar (POLSAR) data is proposed using segmentation that is formulated as a graph partitioning problem. This work is motivated by the fact that human experts are very good at visual interpretation and segmentation of POLSAR data, which is often challenging for automated analysis techniques. Spectral graph partitioning, a framework that has recently emerged in computer vision for solving grouping problems with perceptually plausible results, is used with modifications necessary to accommodate POLSAR data. Using the similarity of edge- aligned patch histograms and spatial proximity, classification performance that is superior to the Wishart classifier is achieved. This approach also provides a way to combine region-based and contour-based segmentation techniques, as it can accommodate different representations of polarimetric data as well as other data sources (e.g., optical imagery).

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.574
Threshold uncertainty score0.325

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations11
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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