MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2900579266 · doi:10.1109/igarss.2018.8518619

Deep Learning Neural Networks for Land Use Land Cover Mapping

2018· article· en· W2900579266 on OpenAlexaffabout
Christopher D. Storie, Christopher J. Henry

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRemote-Sensing Image Classification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Winnipeg
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLand coverComputer scienceSatellite imageryCover (algebra)Deep learningArtificial neural networkFocus (optics)Land useSatelliteProcess (computing)Remote sensingArtificial intelligenceLand information systemMachine learningGeographyLand managementEngineeringCivil engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The importance of accurate and timely information describing the nature and extent of land resources and changes over time is increasing. This research examines the application of deep learning neural networks (DLNN) to the analysis of satellite imagery with specific focus on the production of land use/land cover maps. DLNN have made considerable strides in pattern recognition and machine learning over the last several years. However, their application to remote sensing is less well developed as the technology was originally designed for simple photographs and not satellite imagery. This research presents the results of an experimental study conducted that developed a DLNN to generate land use/land cover maps of the southern agricultural region of Manitoba, Canada. The results of this approach demonstrate a clear advantage in processing time once the DLNN is properly trained when compared to human based semi-automated process.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations54
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRemote-Sensing Image ClassificationFrench-language works237,207