MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2801826172 · doi:10.3390/drones2020016

Use of UAV-Borne Spectrometer for Land Cover Classification

2018· article· en· W2801826172 on OpenAlexafffund
Costas Armenakis, Guy Benari, Regina Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueDrones · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRemote-Sensing Image Classification
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaYork University
KeywordsRemote sensingSpectrometerHyperspectral imagingImaging spectrometerLand coverRGB color modelEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceGeographyLand usePhysicsOpticsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) are being used for low altitude remote sensing for thematic land classification using visible light and multi-spectral sensors. The objective of this work was to investigate the use of UAV equipped with a compact spectrometer for land cover classification. The UAV platform used was a DJI Flamewheel F550 hexacopter equipped with GPS and Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU) navigation sensors, and a Raspberry Pi processor and camera module. The spectrometer used was the FLAME-NIR, a near-infrared spectrometer for hyperspectral measurements. RGB images and spectrometer data were captured simultaneously. As spectrometer data do not provide continuous terrain coverage, the locations of their ground elliptical footprints were determined from the bundle adjustment solution of the captured images. For each of the spectrometer ground ellipses, the land cover signature at the footprint location was determined to enable the characterization, identification, and classification of land cover elements. To attain a continuous land cover classification map, spatial interpolation was carried out from the irregularly distributed labeled spectrometer points. The accuracy of the classification was assessed using spatial intersection with the object-based image classification performed using the RGB images. Results show that in homogeneous land cover, like water, the accuracy of classification is 78% and in mixed classes, like grass, trees and manmade features, the average accuracy is 50%, thus, indicating the contribution of hyperspectral measurements of low altitude UAV-borne spectrometers to improve land cover classification.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations45
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDronesSame topicRemote-Sensing Image ClassificationFrench-language works237,207