Deep Convolutional Neural Network for Complex Wetland Classification Using Optical Remote Sensing Imagery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The synergistic use of spatial features with spectral properties of satellite images enhances thematic land cover information, which is of great significance for complex land cover mapping. Incorporating spatial features within the classification scheme have been mainly carried out by applying just low-level features, which have shown improvement in the classification result. By contrast, the application of high-level spatial features for classification of satellite imagery has been underrepresented. This study aims to address the lack of high-level features by proposing a classification framework based on convolutional neural network (CNN) to learn deep spatial features for wetland mapping using optical remote sensing data. Designing a fully trained new convolutional network is infeasible due to the limited amount of training data in most remote sensing studies. Thus, we applied fine tuning of a pre-existing CNN. Specifically, AlexNet was used for this purpose. The classification results obtained by the deep CNN were compared with those based on well-known ensemble classifiers, namely random forest (RF), to evaluate the efficiency of CNN. Experimental results demonstrated that CNN was superior to RF for complex wetland mapping even by incorporating the small number of input features (i.e., three features) for CNN compared to RF (i.e., eight features). The proposed classification scheme is the first attempt, investigating the potential of fine-tuning pre-existing CNN, for land cover mapping. It also serves as a baseline framework to facilitate further scientific research using the latest state-of-art machine learning tools for processing remote sensing 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".