MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

DEEP MULTI-TASK LEARNING FOR TREE GENERA CLASSIFICATION

2018· article· en· W2805424278 on OpenAlexafffund
Connie Ko, Jian Kang, Gunho Sohn

Bibliographic record

VenueISPRS annals of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaYork University
KeywordsComputer scienceTask (project management)Artificial intelligenceDeep learningConvolutional neural networkMachine learningTree (set theory)Artificial neural networkDecision treeConvolution (computer science)Pattern recognition (psychology)EngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. The goal for our paper is to classify tree genera using airborne Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) data with Convolution Neural Network (CNN) – Multi-task Network (MTN) implementation. Unlike Single-task Network (STN) where only one task is assigned to the learning outcome, MTN is a deep learning architect for learning a main task (classification of tree genera) with other tasks (in our study, classification of coniferous and deciduous) simultaneously, with shared classification features. The main contribution of this paper is to improve classification accuracy from CNN-STN to CNN-MTN. This is achieved by introducing a concurrence loss (Lcd) to the designed MTN. This term regulates the overall network performance by minimizing the inconsistencies between the two tasks. Results show that we can increase the classification accuracy from 88.7 % to 91.0 % (from STN to MTN). The second goal of this paper is to solve the problem of small training sample size by multiple-view data generation. The motivation of this goal is to address one of the most common problems in implementing deep learning architecture, the insufficient number of training data. We address this problem by simulating training dataset with multiple-view approach. The promising results from this paper are providing a basis for classifying a larger number of dataset and number of classes in the future.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.060
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 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

Citations9
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueISPRS annals of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciencesSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207