MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2894165434 · doi:10.1109/mgrs.2018.2854840

New Frontiers in Spectral-Spatial Hyperspectral Image Classification: The Latest Advances Based on Mathematical Morphology, Markov Random Fields, Segmentation, Sparse Representation, and Deep Learning

2018· article· en· W2894165434 on OpenAlexaff
Pedram Ghamisi, Emmanuel Maggiori, Shutao Li, Roberto Souza, Yuliya Tarablaka, Gabriele Moser, Andrea Giorgi, Leyuan Fang, Yushi Chen, Mingmin Chi, Sebastiano B. Serpico, Jón Atli Benediktsson

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Magazine · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRemote-Sensing Image Classification
Canadian institutionsFoothills Medical CentreUniversity of Calgary
FundersDepartment of Science, Information Technology and Innovation, Queensland GovernmentUniversity of HoustonUniversità degli Studi di PaviaEuropean CommissionDepartment of Science and Technology, Ministry of Science and Technology, IndiaPurdue University
KeywordsHyperspectral imagingRemote sensingPattern recognition (psychology)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceImage resolutionSpatial analysisMathematical morphologyMarkov chainSegmentationLand coverContextual image classificationImage processingGeographyImage (mathematics)Machine learningLand useEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, airborne and spaceborne hyperspectral imaging systems have advanced in terms of spectral and spatial resolution, which makes the data sets they produce a valuable source for land cover classification. The availability of hyperspectral data with fine spatial resolution has revolutionized hyperspectral image (HSI) classification techniques by taking advantage of both spectral and spatial information in a single classification framework.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations323
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing MagazineSame topicRemote-Sensing Image ClassificationFrench-language works237,207