Integration of orthoimagery and lidar data for object-based urban thematic mapping using random forests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using high-spatial-resolution multispectral imagery alone is insufficient for achieving highly accurate and reliable thematic mapping of urban areas. Integration of lidar-derived elevation information into image classification can considerably improve classification results. Additionally, traditional pixel-based classifiers have some limitations in regard to certain landscape and data types. In this study, we take advantage of current advances in object-based image analysis and machine learning algorithms to reduce manual image interpretation and automate feature selection in a classification process. A sequence of image segmentation, feature selection, and object classification is developed and tested by the data sets in two study areas (Mannheim, Germany and Niagara Falls, Canada). First, to improve the quality of segmentation, a range image of lidar data is incorporated in an image segmentation process. Among features derived from lidar data and aerial imagery, the random forest, a robust ensemble classifier, is then used to identify the best features using iterative feature elimination. On the condition that the number of samples is at least two or three times the number of features, a segmentation scale factor has no particular effect on the selected features or classification accuracies. The results of the two study areas demonstrate that the presented object-based classification method, compared with the pixel-based classification, improves by 0.02 and 0.05 in kappa statistics, and by 3.9% and 4.5% in overall accuracy, respectively.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".