EVALUATING A CONVOLUTIONAL NEURAL NETWORK FOR FEATURE EXTRACTION AND TREE SPECIES CLASSIFICATION USING UAV-HYPERSPECTRAL IMAGES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. The classification of tree species can significantly benefit from high spatial and spectral information acquired by unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) associated with advanced feature extraction and classification methods. Different from the traditional feature extraction methods, that highly depend on user’s knowledge, the convolutional neural network (CNN)-based method can automatically learn and extract the spatial-related features layer by layer. However, in order to capture significant features of the data, the CNN classifier requires a large number of training samples, which are hardly available when dealing with tree species in tropical forests. This study investigated the following topics concerning the classification of 14 tree species in a subtropical forest area of Southern Brazil: i) the performance of the CNN method associated with a previous step to increase and balance the sample set (data augmentation) for tree species classification as compared to the conventional machine learning methods support vector machine (SVM) and random forest (RF) using the original training data; ii) the performance of the SVM and RF classifiers when associated with a data augmentation step and spatial features extracted from a CNN. Results showed that the CNN classifier outperformed the conventional SVM and RF classifiers, reaching an overall accuracy (OA) of 84.37% and Kappa of 0.82. The SVM and RF had a poor accuracy with the original spectral bands (OA 62.67% and 59.24%) but presented an increase between 14% and 21% in OA when associated with a data augmentation and spatial features extracted from a CNN.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".