MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2411665584 · doi:10.1117/1.jrs.10.026031

Mapping advanced argillic alteration zones with ASTER and Hyperion data in the Andes Mountains of Peru

2016· article· en· W2411665584 on OpenAlexaff
Yuddy Ramos, Kalifa Goı̈ta, Stéphane Péloquin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Remote Sensing · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersJet Propulsion Laboratory
KeywordsAluniteAdvanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection RadiometerArgillic alterationGeologyHyperspectral imagingKaoliniteRemote sensingMultispectral imageMineralogyClay mineralsGeochemistryVolcanoDigital elevation modelVolcanic rockSeismologyHydrothermal circulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study evaluates Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer (ASTER) and Hyperion hyperspectral sensor datasets to detect advanced argillic minerals. The spectral signatures of some alteration clay minerals, such as dickite and alunite, have similar absorption features; thus separating them using multispectral satellite images is a complex challenge. However, Hyperion with its fine spectral bands has potential for good separability of features. The Spectral Angle Mapper algorithm was used in this study to map three advanced argillic alteration minerals (alunite, kaolinite, and dickite) in a known alteration zone in the Peruvian Andes. The results from ASTER and Hyperion were analyzed, compared, and validated using a Portable Infrared Mineral Analyzer field spectrometer. The alterations corresponding to kaolinite and alunite were detected with both ASTER and Hyperion (80% to 84% accuracy). However, the dickite mineral was identified only with Hyperion (82% accuracy).

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)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.208 · 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
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

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Remote SensingSame topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207