MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2529940551 · doi:10.1080/01431161.2016.1244364

Multilayer semantic segmentation of remote-sensing imagery using a hybrid object-based Markov random field model

2016· article· en· W2529940551 on OpenAlexaff
Zheng Chen, Yun Zhang, Leiguang Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Remote Sensing · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRemote-Sensing Image Classification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersWuhan UniversityNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceMarkov random fieldSegmentationArtificial intelligenceMarkov chainPattern recognition (psychology)Probabilistic logicCutGraphField (mathematics)Image segmentationInferenceRandom fieldStochastic matrixData miningMachine learningTheoretical computer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High spatial resolution (HR) remote-sensing image usually contains hierarchical semantic information. Many supervised methods have been developed to interpret this information through data training. In this article, without data training, a hybrid object-based Markov random field (HOMRF) model is proposed for multilayer semantic segmentation of remote-sensing images. In this method, label fields of different semantic layers are defined on the same region adjacency graph (RAG) of a given image, and a hybrid framework is suggested to capture and utilize the interactions within and between semantic layers by label fields. Namely a new transition probability matrix is introduced into the energy functions of label fields for describing the semantic context between layers, and the multilevel logistic model is employed to describe the interactions within the same layer. A principled probabilistic inference is developed to determine the optimal solution of the proposed method by iteratively updating each label field until convergence. The computational complexity of the proposed model is , where is the number of classes in all of the layers, is the number of sites in the probability graph of the MRF model, and is the number of iterations. Experimental results from various remote-sensing images demonstrate that the proposed method can produce higher segmentation accuracy than state-of-the-art MRF-based methods.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.251 · 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
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

Citations8
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Remote SensingSame topicRemote-Sensing Image ClassificationFrench-language works237,207