MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A PROCEDURE FOR IDENTIFYING INVASIVE WILD PARSNIP PLANTS BASED ON VISIBLE BANDS FROM UAV IMAGES

2021· article· en· W3176467692 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Jiawen Liu, Mohammad D. Hossain, D. Chen

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œinternational archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences/International archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsVegetation (pathology)Remote sensingDigital imageSupport vector machineComputer scienceOrientation (vector space)Artificial intelligenceWorkflowPixelCartographyImage processingComputer visionGeographyImage (mathematics)MathematicsDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Wild parsnip is an invasive plant that has serious health risks to humans due to the toxin in its sap. Monitoring its presence has been a challenging task for conservation authorities due to its small size and irregular shape. Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) can obtain ultra-high resolution (UHR) imagery and have been used for vegetation monitoring in recent years. In this study, UAV images captured at Lemoine Point Conservation Area in Kingston, Ontario, are used to test a methodology for distinguishing wild parsnip. The objective of this study is to develop an efficient invasive wild parsnip classification workflow based on UHR digital UAV imagery. Image pre-processing flow includes image orientation, digital elevation model (DEM) and digital surface model (DSM) extractions, and orthomosaicking using Simactive’s software. Three vegetation indices and three texture features are calculated and added to the mosaicked images as additional bands. Image analysis frameworks namely pixel- and object-based method and three classifiers are tested and the object-based Support Vector Machine (SVM) is selected to distinguish wild parsnip from other vegetation types. The optimal image resolutions are undertaken by comparing accuracy assessments. The results provide an executable workflow to distinguish wild parsnip and show that UAV images, with a simple digital camera, are an appropriate and economic resource for small and irregular vegetation detection. This method yields reliable and valid outcomes in detecting wild parsnip plants and demonstrates excellent performance in mapping small vegetation.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œinternational archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences/International archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciencesSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207