MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2565929486 · doi:10.1139/juvs-2016-0009

Object-based analysis of UAS imagery to map emergent and submerged invasive aquatic vegetation: a case study

2016· article· en· W2565929486 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Dominique Chabot, Christopher Dillon, Oumer S. Ahmed, Adam Shemrock

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Unmanned Vehicle Systems · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsTrent UniversityMakivik Corporation
FundersTransport CanadaOntario Federation of Anglers and HuntersOntario Ministry of Natural Resources and ForestryMinistry of Natural Resources
KeywordsVegetation (pathology)Remote sensingMultispectral imageSegmentationDroneComputer scienceCartographyEnvironmental scienceArtificial intelligenceGeographyComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Small unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) combined with automated image analysis may provide an efficient alternative or complement to labour-intensive boat-based monitoring of invasive aquatic vegetation. A small mapping drone was assessed for collecting high-resolution (≤5 cm/pixel) true-colour and near-infrared imagery revealing the distribution of invasive water soldier (Stratiotes aloides) in the Trent–Severn Waterway, Ontario (Canada). We further evaluated the capacity of an object-based image analysis approach based on the Random Forests classification algorithm to map features in the imagery, chiefly emergent and submerged water soldier colonies. The imagery contained flaws and inconsistencies resulting from data collection in suboptimal weather conditions that likely negatively impacted classification performance. Nevertheless, our best-performing classification had a producer’s and user’s accuracy for water soldier of 81% and 74%, respectively, an overall accuracy of 78%, and a kappa value of 61%, indicating “substantial” accuracy. This trial provides an instructive case study on results achieved in a “real-world” application of a UAS for environmental monitoring, notably characterized by time constraints for data collection and analysis. Beyond avoiding data collection in unfavourable weather conditions, adaptations of the image segmentation process and use of a true discrete-band multispectral camera may help to improve classification accuracy, particularly of submerged vegetation.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.420
Threshold uncertainty score0.329

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 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

Citations25
Published2016
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Unmanned Vehicle SystemsSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207