MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3163584383 · doi:10.1109/lgrs.2021.3076661

Fast Ship Detection With Spatial-Frequency Analysis and ANOVA-Based Feature Fusion

2021· article· en· W3163584383 on OpenAlexafffund
Wandong Zhang, Q. M. Jonathan Wu, Yimin Yang, Thangarajah Akilan, W. G. Will Zhao, Qingzhong Li, Jiong Niu

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning and ELM
Canadian institutionsVector InstituteUniversity of WindsorLakehead University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsClutterComputer scienceArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)RadarFeature extractionFeature (linguistics)Doppler effectTime–frequency analysisClassifier (UML)FusionAlgorithmComputer visionTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High-frequency surface wave radar (HFSWR) can be effectively used to detect ships in the exclusive economic zone. However, the ship signal is concealed and interfered with various clutter and background noise in the Doppler spectrum. In this letter, a range-Doppler (RD) image-based novel ship detection algorithm is proposed by exploiting spatial-frequency information and a unique feature fusion based on the analysis of variance. The algorithm subsumes three successive stages: Stage I—the plausible region of interest is captured, Stage II—the features from different sources are fused into one generalized feature space, and Stage III—an extreme learning machine-based classifier is utilized to localize the ships. Experimental results on challenging HFSWR-RD datasets demonstrate that the proposed algorithm has a competitive performance over other ship detection algorithms.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations21
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing LettersSame topicMachine Learning and ELMFrench-language works237,207