HOW FAR SHOULD I LOOK? A NEURAL ARCHITECTURE SEARCH STRATEGY FOR SEMANTIC SEGMENTATION OF REMOTE SENSING IMAGES
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Neural architecture search (NAS) is a subset of automated machine learning that tries to find the best neural network to perform a given task. In this article, a network search space is defined and applied to perform the semantic segmentation of satellite imagery. Due to the spatial nature of the data, the search space uses cells that group parallel operations with kernels of different sizes, providing options to accommodate the neighborhood information required to perform a better classification. The architecture search space follows a UNet-like network. The proposed approach uses scaled sigmoid gates, a strategy for network pruning that was adapted to search for the best operations on the cell search space. The architecture achieved by the proposed approach uses wider kernels on lower resolution feature maps, which leads to the interpretation that some pixels required information from pixels farther away than expected. The resulting network was compared to a very similar UNet-like network that only used 3×3 convolutions. The resulting network shows slightly better results on the test set.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it