MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4212853599 · doi:10.1109/jstars.2022.3144318

The Outcome of the 2021 IEEE GRSS Data Fusion Contest—Track MSD: Multitemporal Semantic Change Detection

2022· article· en· W4212853599 on OpenAlexaff
Zhuohong Li, Fangxiao Lu, Hongyan Zhang, Lilin Tu, Jiayi Li, Xin Huang, Caleb Robinson, Nikolay Malkin, Nebojša Jojić, Pedram Ghamisi, Ronny Hänsch, Naoto Yokoya

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTime Series Analysis and Forecasting
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMila - Quebec Artificial Intelligence Institute
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceCONTESTSensor fusionFusionChange detectionArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present here the scientific outcomes of the 2021 Data Fusion Contest (DFC2021) organized by the Image Analysis and Data Fusion Technical Committee of the IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Society. DFC2021 was dedicated to research on geospatial artificial intelligence (AI) for social good with a global objective of modeling the state and changes of artificial and natural environments from multimodal and multitemporal remotely sensed data toward sustainable developments. DFC2021 included two challenge tracks: “Detection of settlements without electricity” and “Multitemporal semantic change detection.” This article mainly focuses on the outcome of the multitemporal semantic change detection track. We describe in this article the DFC2021 dataset that remains available for further evaluation of corresponding approaches and report the results of the best-performing methods during the contest.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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 score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.138

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.007

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 head0.427
GPT teacher head0.521
Teacher spread0.094 · 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

Citations40
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicTime Series Analysis and ForecastingFrench-language works237,207