SPECTRAL-SPATIAL CLASSIFICATION OF HYPERSPECTRAL IMAGERY USING A HYBRID FRAMEWORK
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Hyperspectral Images are worthwhile data for many processing algorithms (e.g. Dimensionality Reduction, Target Detection, Change Detection, Classification and Unmixing). Classification is a key issue in processing hyperspectral images. Spectral-identification-based algorithms are sensitive to spectral variability and noise in acquisition. There are many algorithms for classification. This paper describes a new framework for classification of hyperspectral images, based on both spectral and spatial information. The spatial information is obtained by an enhanced Marker-based Hierarchical Segmentation (MHS) algorithm. The hyperspectral data is first fed into the Multi-Layer Perceptron (MLP) neural network classification algorithm. Then, the MHS algorithm is applied in order to increase the accuracy of less-accurately classified land-cover types. In the proposed approach, the markers are extracted from the classification maps obtained by MLP and Support Vector Machines (SVM) classifiers. Experimental results on Quebec City hyperspectral dataset, demonstrate that the proposed approach achieves approximately 9% and 5% better overall accuracy than the MLP and the original MHS algorithms respectively.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".