MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

EVALUATION OF UNet AND UNet++ ARCHITECTURES IN HIGH RESOLUTION IMAGE CHANGE DETECTION APPLICATIONS

2020· article· en· W3080805846 on OpenAlexafffund
Evangelos Bousias Alexakis, Costas Armenakis

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œinternational archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences/International archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRemote-Sensing Image Classification
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaYork University
KeywordsComputer scienceChange detectionArtificial intelligenceSegmentationDeep learningConvolutional neural networkCross entropyDiceTask (project management)Hinge lossMachine learningPattern recognition (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Change detection applications from satellite imagery can be a very useful tool in monitoring human activities and understanding their interaction with the physical environment. In the past few years most of the recent research approaches to automatic change detection have been based on the application of Deep Learning techniques and especially on variations of Convolutional Neural Network architectures due to their great representational capacity and their state-of-the-art performance in visual tasks such as image classification and semantic segmentation. In this work we train and evaluate two CNN architectures, UNet and UNet++, on a change detection task using Very High-Resolution satellite images collected at two different time epochs. We also examine and analyse the effect of two different loss functions, a combination of the Binary Cross Entropy Loss with the Dice Loss, and the Lovász Hinge loss, both of which were specifically designed for semantic segmentation applications. Finally, we experiment with the use of data augmentation as well as deep supervision techniques to evaluate and quantify their contribution in the final classification performance of the different network architectures.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations62
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œinternational archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences/International archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciencesSame topicRemote-Sensing Image ClassificationFrench-language works237,207