MSMD: maximum separability and minimum dependency feature selection for cropland classification from optical and radar data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cropland classification using optical and full polarimetric synthetic aperture radar (PolSAR) images is a topic of considerable interest in the remote-sensing community. These two data sources can provide a diverse set of temporal, spectral, textural and polarimetric features which can be invaluable for cropland classification. However, some optical features or some radar features may have a relatively high correlation with other features. Hence, it seems to be necessary to choose the optimum features in order to reduce the dimensions of the data and to improve cropland classification accuracy. This article proposes a strategic feature selection method from a feature set of bitemporal RapidEye and Uninhabited Aerial Vehicle synthetic aperture radar (UAVSAR) images. The proposed method is designed to select the most relevant features and to remove redundant features based on the two concepts of separability and dependency. The proposed method is therefore referred to as maximum separability and minimum dependency (MSMD). For evaluating efficiency, MSMD and some well-known filter and wrapper feature selection methods are compared using a random forest classifier. Experimental tests confirmed that the classification results obtained from the MSMD feature selection method were more accurate than those achieved by filter methods. Moreover, they had an accuracy comparable to that of the results from the wrapper method. Furthermore, with regard to running time, MSMD operated as fast as the filter methods. It had a straightforward structure compared to the wrapper method, and as a result was faster than this method.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".