MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3205209293 · doi:10.1109/tgrs.2021.3113856

WetNet: A Spatial–Temporal Ensemble Deep Learning Model for Wetland Classification Using Sentinel-1 and Sentinel-2

2021· article· en· W3205209293 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Benyamin Hosseiny, Masoud Mahdianpari, Brian Brisco, Fariba Mohammadimanesh, Bahram Salehi

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFlood Risk Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsCentre For Cold Ocean Resources EngineeringMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Resources Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceDeep learningLand coverBoosting (machine learning)Synthetic aperture radarMachine learningRemote sensingData miningPattern recognition (psychology)Land useGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While deep learning models have been extensively applied to land-use land-cover (LULC) problems, it is still a relatively new and emerging topic for separating and classifying wetland types. On the other hand, ensemble learning has demonstrated promising results in improving and boosting classification accuracy. Accordingly, this study aims to develop a classification system for mapping complex wetland areas by incorporating deep ensemble learning and satellite datasets. To this end, time series of Sentinel-1 dual-polarized Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) dataset, alongside Sentinel-2 multispectral imagery (MSI), are used as input data to the model. In order to increase the diversity of the extracted features, the proposed model, herein called WetNet, consists of three different submodels, comprising several recurrent and convolutional layers. Furthermore, multiple ensembling sections are added to different stages of the model to increase the transferability of the model (to other areas) and the reliability of the final results. WetNet is evaluated in a complex wetland area located in Newfoundland, Canada. Experimental results indicate that WetNet outperforms the state-of-the-art deep models (e.g., InceptionResnetV2, InceptionV3, and DenseNet121) in terms of both the classification accuracy and processing time. This makes WetNet an efficient model for large-scale wetland mapping application. The python code of the proposed WetNet model is available at the following link for the sake of reproducibility:https://colab.research.google.com/drive/1pvMOd3_tFYaMYGyHNfxqDxOiwF78lKgN?usp=sharing

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations105
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote SensingSame topicFlood Risk Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207