MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

SUPERVISED CLASSIFICATION PROCESSES FOR THE CHARACTERIZATION OF HERITAGE ELEMENTS, CASE STUDY: CUENCA-ECUADOR

2017· article· en· W2747210151 on OpenAlexaff
Josephine I. Briones, V. Heras, Carmen Abril, E. Sinchi

Bibliographic record

VenueISPRS annals of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topic3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceProcess (computing)Support vector machineGeneralizationSegmentationFunction (biology)Kernel (algebra)Cultural heritageArtificial intelligenceMachine learningData miningGeographyArchaeologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. The proper control of built heritage entails many challenges related to the complexity of heritage elements and the extent of the area to be managed, for which the available resources must be efficiently used. In this scenario, the preventive conservation approach, based on the concept that prevent is better than cure, emerges as a strategy to avoid the progressive and imminent loss of monuments and heritage sites. Regular monitoring appears as a key tool to identify timely changes in heritage assets. This research demonstrates that the supervised learning model (Support Vector Machines – SVM) is an ideal tool that supports the monitoring process detecting visible elements in aerial images such as roofs structures, vegetation and pavements. The linear, gaussian and polynomial kernel functions were tested; the lineal function provided better results over the other functions. It is important to mention that due to the high level of segmentation generated by the classification procedure, it was necessary to apply a generalization process through opening a mathematical morphological operation, which simplified the over classification for the monitored elements.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.109

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueISPRS annals of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciencesSame topic3D Surveying and Cultural HeritageFrench-language works237,207