MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2954521826 · doi:10.1109/lgrs.2019.2919918

Subpixel Land-Cover Mapping Based on Extended Random Walker

2019· article· en· W2954521826 on OpenAlexaff
Peng Wang, Gong Zhang, Hui Bi, Henry Leung

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRemote-Sensing Image Classification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersEast China Normal UniversityChina Postdoctoral Science FoundationNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsSubpixel renderingArtificial intelligenceComputer visionUpsamplingImage resolutionComputer scienceInterpolation (computer graphics)SegmentationImage segmentationObject (grammar)PixelPattern recognition (psychology)Principal component analysisImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this letter, a novel subpixel mapping (SPM) based on extended random walker (ERW) (SPMERW) is proposed. First, the resolution of the original coarse remote sensing image is upsampled by bicubic interpolation. Second, the class proportions of subpixel are produced by unmixing the upsampled image. Irregular objects are generated by adaptive segmentation of the first principal component of the upsampled image. Third, the class proportions of the object are derived by averaged fusion of the class proportions of subpixel belonging to each object in the segmentation image. Object spatial dependence including the spatial information among and within the objects is obtained by the ERW algorithm. Finally, a class allocation method based on units of the object is utilized to obtain the SPM result according to the object spatial dependence. Experimental results on two remote sensing data sets show that the proposed SPMERW outperforms the state-of-the-art SPM methods.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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