MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3139347168 · doi:10.3390/rs13061178

Airborne Hyperspectral Data Acquisition and Processing in the Arctic: A Pilot Study Using the Hyspex Imaging Spectrometer for Wetland Mapping

2021· article· en· W3139347168 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jordi Cristóbal, Patrick Graham, Anupma Prakash, Marcel Buchhorn, R. Gens, Nikki Guldager, Mark R. Bertram

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Science Foundation of Sri LankaU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
KeywordsHyperspectral imagingRemote sensingImaging spectrometerEnvironmental scienceBidirectional reflectance distribution functionCohen's kappaComputer scienceSpectrometerGeologyReflectivity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A pilot study for mapping the Arctic wetlands was conducted in the Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge (Refuge), Alaska. It included commissioning the HySpex VNIR-1800 and the HySpex SWIR-384 imaging spectrometers in a single-engine Found Bush Hawk aircraft, planning the flight times, direction, and speed to minimize the strong bidirectional reflectance distribution function (BRDF) effects present at high latitudes and establishing improved data processing workflows for the high-latitude environments. Hyperspectral images were acquired on two clear-sky days in early September, 2018, over three pilot study areas that together represented a wide variety of vegetation and wetland environments. Steps to further minimize BRDF effects and achieve a higher geometric accuracy were added to adapt and improve the Hyspex data processing workflow, developed by the German Aerospace Center (DLR), for high-latitude environments. One-meter spatial resolution hyperspectral images, that included a subset of only 120 selected spectral bands, were used for wetland mapping. A six-category legend was established based on previous U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) information and maps, and three different classification methods—hybrid classification, spectral angle mapper, and maximum likelihood—were used at two selected sites. The best classification performance occurred when using the maximum likelihood classifier with an averaged Kappa index of 0.95; followed by the spectral angle mapper (SAM) classifier with a Kappa index of 0.62; and, lastly, by the hybrid classifier showing lower performance with a Kappa index of 0.51. Recommendations for improvements of future work include the concurrent acquisition of LiDAR or RGB photo-derived digital surface models as well as detailed spectra collection for Alaska wetland cover to improve classification efforts.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.543

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.222 · 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.

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

Citations25
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207