MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2620830647 · doi:10.1109/jstars.2017.2706190

Spectral–Spatial Semisupervised Hyperspectral Classification Using Adaptive Neighborhood

2017· article· en· W2620830647 on OpenAlexaff
Nasehe Jamshidpour, Abdolreza Safari, Saeid Homayouni

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRemote-Sensing Image Classification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersUniversità degli Studi di Pavia
KeywordsHyperspectral imagingPattern recognition (psychology)Spatial analysisArtificial intelligencePixelComputer scienceGraphSupport vector machineContextual image classificationMathematicsComputer visionImage (mathematics)Statistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Semisupervised learning (SSL) methods have shown great potential in the hyperspectral classification with a limited number of labeled samples. In this paper, we suggest a new graph-based SSL (GBSSL) using both spectral and spatial information. In the first step, we constructed two graphs using spectral and spatial information. Then, the Laplacians of both spectral and spatial graphs were merged to form a weighted joint graph. To improve the quality of spatial neighborhood for conforming the image objects, we employed the adaptive neighborhood (AN) technique. Instead of using the conventional crisp spatial neighborhood, the flat zone area filtering approach was used to define AN and extract the spatial information. By this way, each pixel is only connected to the pixels of a single flat zone, which presents a particular object in the image. Consequently, the border between different classes is extracted more precisely. As a result, the final classified map is more homogenous, and the salt and pepper effect is removed. To evaluate the efficiency of the proposed method, the experiments were carried out on three real benchmark hyperspectral data sets with different types of land cover, and different spectral and spatial resolutions. The results of the proposed method showed excellent performances in all data sets, specifically where a very limited number of labeled training samples were available. This method achieves a significant improvement compared to the state-of-the-art classifiers such as SVM, spectral-spatial SVM, and spectral-spatial GBSSL.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.199 · 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
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

Citations11
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote SensingSame topicRemote-Sensing Image ClassificationFrench-language works237,207