MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Comparison of Speckle Noise Filters on Crop Classification Based on Sentinel-1 Sar Time-Series

2021· article· en· W4285323819 on OpenAlexaff
Arturo Velasco, Bernhard Rabus, Mirza Faisal Beg

Bibliographic record

Venue2021 IEEE International India Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium (InGARSS) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil Moisture and Remote Sensing
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGround truthSpeckle patternRemote sensingComputer scienceSpeckle noiseSynthetic aperture radarRandom forestArtificial intelligenceEnvironmental scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Knowing the spatial distribution of crops is key for the estimation of water consumption, crop yield, food policy, among others. In this study, dual-polarization (VV/VH) intensity time-series C-band Sentinel-1 sensor are used to perform crop classification with two models: Spectral Similarity Value SSV and Random Forest RF. Their performance was evaluated under three SAR speckle filter scenarios, for each polarization. Scenario 1 Sigma Lee, Scenario 2 IDAN, and Scenario 3 Non-Local Means. Crop classification was performed with 24 images of 2018. Ground-truth data for training/validation was obtained from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). RF shows better performance than SSV for all scenarios. Non-Local Means filter delivers the best results. VH polarization performs better that VV in all scenarios. The best accuracy for SSV model is 0.73, and for RF model is 0.95 both using VH polarization.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.257 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2021 IEEE International India Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium (InGARSS)Same topicSoil Moisture and Remote SensingFrench-language works237,207