Super-Resolution Mapping Based on Spatial–Spectral Correlation for Spectral Imagery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Due to the influences of imaging conditions, spectral imagery can be coarse and contain a large number of mixed pixels. These mixed pixels can lead to inaccuracies in the land-cover class (LC) mapping. Super-resolution mapping (SRM) can be used to analyze such mixed pixels and obtain the LC mapping information at the subpixel level. However, traditional SRM methods mostly rely on spatial correlation based on linear distance, which ignores the influences of nonlinear imaging conditions. In addition, spectral unmixing errors affect the accuracy of utilized spectral properties. In order to overcome the influence of linear and nonlinear imaging conditions and utilize more accurate spectral properties, the SRM based on spatial-spectral correlation (SSC) is proposed in this work. Spatial correlation is obtained using the mixed spatial attraction model (MSAM) based on the linear Euclidean distance. Besides, a spectral correlation that utilizes spectral properties based on the nonlinear Kullback-Leibler distance (KLD) is proposed. Spatial and spectral correlations are combined to reduce the influences of linear and nonlinear imaging conditions, which results in an improved mapping result. The utilized spectral properties are extracted directly by spectral imagery, thus avoiding the spectral unmixing errors. Experimental results on the three spectral images show that the proposed SSC yields better mapping results than state-of-the-art 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".