MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2787879829 · doi:10.3390/rs10020237

Flood Extent Mapping from Time-Series SAR Images Based on Texture Analysis and Data Fusion

2018· article· en· W2787879829 on OpenAlexaffabout
Moslem Ouled Sghaier, Imen Hammami, Samuel Foucher, Richard Lepage

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFlood Risk Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie SupérieureComputer Research Institute of MontréalUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSynthetic aperture radarRemote sensingPixelFlood mythLand coverFlooding (psychology)HomogeneousContext (archaeology)Computer scienceGeographyLand useArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nowadays, satellite images are considered as one of the most relevant sources of information in the context of major disasters management. Their availability in extreme weather conditions and their ability to cover wide geographic areas make them an indispensable tool toward an effective disaster response. Among the various available sensors, Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) is distinguished in the context of flood management by its ability to penetrate cloud cover and its robustness to unfavourable weather conditions. This work aims at developing a new technique for flooded areas extraction from high resolution time-series SAR images. The proposed approach is mainly based on three steps: first, homogeneous regions characterizing water surfaces are extracted from each SAR image using a local texture descriptor. Then, mathematical morphology is applied to filter tiny artifacts and small homogeneous areas present in the image. And finally, spatial and radiometric information embedded in each pixel are extracted and are fused with the same pixel information but from another image to decide if the current pixel belongs to a flooded region. In order to assess the performance of the proposed algorithm, our methodology was applied to time-series images acquired before and during three different flooding events: (1) Richelieu River and lake Champlain floods, Quebec, Canada in 2011; (2) Evros River floods, Greece in 2014 and (3) Western and southwestern of Iran floods in 2016. Experiments show that our approach gives very promising results compared to existing techniques.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.943
Threshold uncertainty score0.529

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 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

Citations68
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicFlood Risk Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207