Landscape Similarity Analysis Using Texture Encoded Deep-Learning Features on Unclassified Remote Sensing Imagery
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) are known for their ability to learn shape and texture descriptors useful for object detection, pattern recognition, and classification problems. Deeper layer filters of CNN generally learn global image information vital for whole-scene or object discrimination. In landscape pattern comparison, however, dense localized information encoded in shallow layers can contain discriminative information for characterizing changes across image local regions but are often lost in the deeper and non-spatial fully connected layers. Such localized features hold potential for identifying, as well as characterizing, process–pattern change across space and time. In this paper, we propose a simple yet effective texture-based CNN (Tex-CNN) via a feature concatenation framework which results in capturing and learning texture descriptors. The traditional CNN architecture was adopted as a baseline for assessing the performance of Tex-CNN. We utilized 75% and 25% of the image data for model training and validation, respectively. To test the models’ generalization, we used a separate set of imagery from the Aerial Imagery Dataset (AID) and Sentinel-2 for model development and independent validation. The classical CNN and the Tex-CNN classification accuracies in the AID were 91.67% and 96.33%, respectively. Tex-CNN accuracy was either on par with or outcompeted state-of-the-art methods. Independent validation on Sentinel-2 data had good performance for most scene types but had difficulty discriminating farm scenes, likely due to geometric generalization of discriminative features at the coarser scale. In both datasets, the Tex-CNN outperformed the classical CNN architecture. Using the Tex-CNN, gradient-based spatial attention maps (feature maps) which contain discriminative pattern information are extracted and subsequently employed for mapping landscape similarity. To enhance the discriminative capacity of the feature maps, we further perform spatial filtering, using PCA and select eigen maps with the top eigen values. We show that CNN feature maps provide descriptors capable of characterizing and quantifying landscape (dis)similarity. Using the feature maps histogram of oriented gradient vectors and computing their Earth Movers Distances, our method effectively identified similar landscape types with over 60% of target-reference scene comparisons showing smaller Earth Movers Distance (EMD) (e.g., 0.01), while different landscape types tended to show large EMD (e.g., 0.05) in the benchmark AID. We hope this proposal will inspire further research into the use of CNN layer feature maps in landscape similarity assessment, as well as in change detection.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it