MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3092846496

A New Tree-based Classifier for Satellite Images

2013· article· en· W3092846496 on OpenAlexaffabout
Reshu Agarwal, Pritam Ranjan

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsAcadia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClassifier (UML)Computer scienceArtificial intelligencePixelPattern recognition (psychology)Multiclass classificationContextual image classificationBinary classificationSatellite imageryRemote sensingData miningGeographyImage (mathematics)Support vector machine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Classification of satellite images is a key component of many remote sensing applications. One of the most important products of a raw satellite image is the classified map which labels the image pixels into meaningful classes. Though several parametric and non-parametric classifiers have been developed thus far, accurate labeling of the pixels still remains a challenge. In this paper, we propose a new reliable multiclass-classifier for identifying class labels of a satellite image in remote sensing applications. The proposed multiclass-classifier is a generalization of a binary classifier based on the flexible ensemble of regression trees model called Bayesian Additive Regression Trees (BART). We used three small areas from the LANDSAT 5 TM image, acquired on August 15, 2009 (path/row: 08/29, L1T product, UTM map projection) over Kings County, Nova Scotia, Canada to classify the land-use. Several prediction accuracy and uncertainty measures have been used to compare the reliability of the proposed classifier with the state-of-the-art classifiers in remote sensing.

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)0.005
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.165
Teacher spread0.113 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)→Same topicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping→French-language works237,207→