MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3120662950 · doi:10.1080/01431161.2020.1862437

Building change detection in very high-resolution remote sensing image based on pseudo-orthorectification

2021· article· en· W3120662950 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Hui Chen, Zhang Ka, Wen Xiao, Yehua Sheng, Liang Cheng, Wei Zhou, Pengbo Wang, Dong Su, Longjie Ye, Shan Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Remote Sensing · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRemote-Sensing Image Classification
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Jiangsu ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaMinistry of Natural Resources
KeywordsOrthophotoComputer scienceAerial imageShadow (psychology)Computer visionRemote sensingArtificial intelligenceChange detectionFacadeSatelliteLine (geometry)Consistency (knowledge bases)Constraint (computer-aided design)Elevation (ballistics)RoofPhotogrammetryImage (mathematics)GeographyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When using very high-resolution (VHR) remote sensing images acquired at different times to detect building changes, the building positional inconsistencies caused by different satellite imaging angles are an outstanding issue. To tackle this problem, a novel building change detection method based on pseudo-orthorectification (PO) is proposed. First, to determine the building displacement value, a fast line detection method is used to accurately extract the building vertical facade contour lines under the constraint of the Object Space Positioning Consistency (OSPC). Second, the building roof sample selection is automatically conducted under the constraint of building facade contour lines, and the Grab-Cut algorithm is used to extract the roofs combining with corresponding geometric rules. Then, the roof of each building is shifted along the elevation line to its real location. Finally, subtraction is applied to generate the difference image, and reliable change information is obtained by integrating NDVI and shadow information of the building. Three sets of WorldView and QuickBird satellite images are used to compare the proposed method with three state-of-the-art methods. The experimental results show that the average accuracy of the proposed method can reach 92.80%, which is 12.66% higher than that of compared 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.731
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations17
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Remote SensingSame topicRemote-Sensing Image ClassificationFrench-language works237,207