Improvement of Clustering Methods for Modelling Abrupt Land Surface Changes in Satellite Image Fusions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A key challenge in developing models for the fusion of surface reflectance data across multiple satellite sensors is ensuring that they apply to both gradual vegetation phenological dynamics and abrupt land surface changes. To better model land cover spatial and temporal changes, we proposed previously a Prediction Smooth Reflectance Fusion Model (PSRFM) that combines a dynamic prediction model based on the linear spectral mixing model with a smoothing filter corresponding to the weighted average of forward and backward temporal predictions. One of the significant advantages of PSRFM is that PSRFM can model abrupt land surface changes either through optimized clusters or the residuals of the predicted gradual changes. In this paper, we expanded our approach and developed more efficient methods for clustering. We applied the new methods for dramatic land surface changes caused by a flood and a forest fire. Comparison of the model outputs showed that the new methods can capture the land surface changes more effectively. We also compared the improved PSRFM to two most popular reflectance fusion algorithms: Spatial and Temporal Adaptive Reflectance Fusion Model (STARFM) and Enhanced version of STARFM (ESTARFM). The results showed that the improved PSRFM is more effective and outperforms STARFM and ESTARFM both visually and quantitatively.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".