MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281770639 · doi:10.3390/rs14112668

Crop Classification Based on the Physically Constrained General Model-Based Decomposition Using Multi-Temporal RADARSAT-2 Data

2022· article· en· W4281770639 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Qinghua Xie, Qi Dou, Xing Peng, Jinfei Wang, Juan M. López‐Sánchez, Jiali Shang, Haiqiang Fu, Jianjun Zhu

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and Techniques
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaWestern University
FundersCanadian Space AgencyMinisterio de Ciencia e InnovaciónNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaUniversidad de Alicante
KeywordsComputer scienceRobustness (evolution)Remote sensingDecompositionPattern recognition (psychology)Data miningArtificial intelligenceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Crop identification and classification are of great significance to agricultural land use management. The physically constrained general model-based decomposition (PCGMD) has proven to be a promising method in comparison with the typical four-component decomposition methods in scattering mechanism interpretation and identifying vegetation types. However, the robustness of PCGMD requires further investigation from the perspective of final applications. This paper aims to validate the efficiency of the PCGMD method on crop classification for the first time. Seven C-band time-series RADARSAT-2 images were exploited, covering the entire growing season over an agricultural region near London, Ontario, Canada. Firstly, the response and temporal evolution of the four scattering components obtained by PCGMD were analyzed. Then, a forward selection approach was applied to achieve the highest classification accuracy by searching an optimum combination of multi-temporal SAR data with the random forest (RF) algorithm. For comparison, the general model-based decomposition method (GMD), the original and its three improved Yamaguchi four-component decomposition approaches (Y4O, Y4R, S4R, G4U), were used in all tests. The results reveal that the PCGMD method is highly sensitive to seasonal crop changes and matches well with the real physical characteristics of the crops. Among all test methods used, the PCGMD method using six images obtained the optimum classification performance, reaching an overall accuracy of 91.83%.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.741
Threshold uncertainty score0.710

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and TechniquesFrench-language works237,207