A Critical Review of High and Very High-Resolution Remote Sensing Approaches for Detecting and Mapping Slums: Trends, Challenges and Emerging Opportunities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Slums are a global urban challenge, with less developed countries being particularly impacted. To adequately detect and map them, data is needed on their location, spatial extent and evolution. High- and very high-resolution remote sensing imagery has emerged as an important source of data in this regard. The purpose of this paper is to critically review studies that have used such data to detect and map slums. Our analysis shows that while such studies have been increasing over time, they tend to be concentrated to a few geographical areas and often focus on the use of a single approach (e.g., image texture and object-based image analysis), thus limiting generalizability to understand slums, their population, and evolution within the global context. We argue that to develop a more comprehensive framework that can be used to detect and map slums, other emerging sourcing of geospatial data should be considered (e.g., volunteer geographic information) in conjunction with growing trends and advancements in technology (e.g., geosensor networks). Through such data integration and analysis we can then create a benchmark for determining the most suitable methods for mapping slums in a given locality, thus fostering the creation of new approaches to address this challenge.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".