The Correlation Coefficient as a Simple Tool for the Localization of Errors in Spectroscopic Imaging Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The correlation coefficient (CC) was substantiated as a simple, yet robust statistical tool in the quality assessment of hyperspectral imaging (HSI) data. The sensitivity of the metric was also characterized with respect to artificially-induced errors. The CC was found to be sensitive to spectral shifts and single feature modifications in hyperspectral ground data despite the high, artificially-induced, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of 100:1. The study evaluated eight airborne hyperspectral images that varied in acquisition spectrometer, acquisition date and processing methodology. For each image, we identified a uniform ground target region of interest (ROI) that was comprised of a single asphalt road pixel from each column within the sensor field-of-view (FOV). A CC was calculated between the spectra from each of the pixels in the ROI and the data from the center pixel. Potential errors were located by reductions in the CCs below a designated threshold, which was derived from the results of the sensitivity tests. The spectral range associated with each error was established using a windowing technique where the CCs were recalculated after removing the spectral data within various windows. Errors were isolated in the spectral window that removed the previously-identified reductions in the CCs. Finer errors were detected by calculating the CCs across the ROI in the spectral range surrounding various atmospheric absorption features. Despite only observing deviations in the CCs from the 3rd–6th decimal places, non-trivial errors were detected in the imagery. An error was detected within a single band of the shortwave infrared imagery. Errors were also observed throughout the visible-near-infrared imagery, especially in the blue end. With this methodology, it was possible to immediately gauge the spectral consistency of the HSI data across the FOV. Consequently, the effectiveness of various processing methodologies and the spectral consistency of the imaging spectrometers themselves could be studied. Overall, the research highlights the utility of the CC as a simple, low monetary cost, analytical tool for the localization of errors in spectroscopic imaging data.
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 | 0.012 | 0.041 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".