MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160934142 · doi:10.3390/rs4082256

Object-Based Classification of Urban Areas Using VHR Imagery and Height Points Ancillary Data

2012· article· en· W2160934142 on OpenAlexafffund
Bahram Salehi, Yun Zhang, Ming Zhong, Vivek Dey

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRemote-Sensing Image Classification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsImpervious surfaceLand coverComputer scienceCohen's kappaThematic mapRemote sensingSupport vector machinePattern recognition (psychology)Object basedClassifier (UML)Contextual image classificationArtificial intelligenceObject (grammar)Data miningCartographyLand useImage (mathematics)GeographyMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Land cover classification of very high resolution (VHR) imagery over urban areas is an extremely challenging task. Impervious land covers such as buildings, roads, and parking lots are spectrally too similar to be separated using only the spectral information of VHR imagery. Additional information, therefore, is required for separating such land covers by the classifier. One source of additional information is the vector data, which are available in archives for many urban areas. Further, the object-based approach provides a more effective way to incorporate vector data into the classification process as the misregistration between different layers is less problematic in object-based compared to pixel-based image analysis. In this research, a hierarchical rule-based object-based classification framework was developed based on a small subset of QuickBird (QB) imagery coupled with a layer of height points called Spot Height (SH) to classify a complex urban environment. In the rule-set, different spectral, morphological, contextual, class-related, and thematic layer features were employed. To assess the general applicability of the rule-set, the same classification framework and a similar one using slightly different thresholds applied to larger subsets of QB and IKONOS (IK), respectively. Results show an overall accuracy of 92% and 86% and a Kappa coefficient of 0.88 and 0.80 for the QB and IK Test image, respectively. The average producers’ accuracies for impervious land cover types were also 82% and 74.5% for QB and IK.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations108
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicRemote-Sensing Image ClassificationFrench-language works237,207