EVALUATION OF MULTIPLE KERNEL LEARNING ALGORITHMS FOR CROPMAPPING USING SATELLITE IMAGE TIME-SERIES DATA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Crop mapping through classification of Satellite Image Time-Series (SITS) data can provide very valuable information for several agricultural applications, such as crop monitoring, yield estimation, and crop inventory. However, the SITS data classification is not straightforward. Because different images of a SITS data have different levels of information regarding the classification problems. Moreover, the SITS data is a four-dimensional data that cannot be classified using the conventional classification algorithms. To address these issues in this paper, we presented a classification strategy based on Multiple Kernel Learning (MKL) algorithms for SITS data classification. In this strategy, initially different kernels are constructed from different images of the SITS data and then they are combined into a composite kernel using the MKL algorithms. The composite kernel, once constructed, can be used for the classification of the data using the kernel-based classification algorithms. We compared the computational time and the classification performances of the proposed classification strategy using different MKL algorithms for the purpose of crop mapping. The considered MKL algorithms are: MKL-Sum, SimpleMKL, LPMKL and Group-Lasso MKL algorithms. The experimental tests of the proposed strategy on two SITS data sets, acquired by SPOT satellite sensors, showed that this strategy was able to provide better performances when compared to the standard classification algorithm. The results also showed that the optimization method of the used MKL algorithms affects both the computational time and classification accuracy of this strategy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".