A Machine Learning Approach to Waterbody Segmentation in Thermal Infrared Imagery in Support of Tactical Wildfire Mapping
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wildfire research is working toward near real-time tactical wildfire mapping through the application of computer vision techniques to airborne thermal infrared (IR) imagery. One issue hindering automation is the potential for waterbodies to be marked as areas of combustion due to their relative warmth in nighttime thermal imagery. Segmentation and masking of waterbodies could help resolve this issue, but the reliance on data captured exclusively in the thermal IR and the presence of real areas of combustion in some of the images introduces unique challenges. This study explores the use of the random forest (RF) classifier for the segmentation of waterbodies in thermal IR images containing a heterogenous wildfire. Features for classification are generated through the application of contextual and textural filters, as well as normalization techniques. The classifier’s outputs are compared against static GIS-based data on waterbody extent as well as the outputs of two unsupervised segmentation techniques, based on entropy and variance, respectively. Our results show that the RF classifier achieves very high balanced accuracy (>98.6%) for thermal imagery with and without wildfire pixels, with an overall F1 score of 0.98. The RF method surpassed the accuracy of all others tested, even with heterogenous training sets as small as 20 images. In addition to assisting automation of wildfire mapping, the efficiency and accuracy of this approach to segmentation can facilitate the creation of larger training data sets, which are necessary for invoking more complex deep learning approaches.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".