MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307849690 · doi:10.36227/techrxiv.21430644

Image Prediction Using Coordinated Hyperspectral and RGB Video of Dynamic Natural Water Scenes

2022· preprint· en· W4307849690 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
CHRIS LEE, Charles M. Bachmann, Nayma Binte Nur, Kimberly E. Union, Christopher S. Lapszynski, Dylan J. Shiltz

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRemote-Sensing Image Classification
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHyperspectral imagingRGB color modelRemote sensingArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceComputer visionChemical imagingGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A bimodal video imaging platform combining RGB and 371-band hyperspectral imaging systems was used to collect time-series data of the Lake Ontario shoreline at Hamlin Beach State Park in Rochester, New York, USA. We predicted the hyperspectral image frames of dynamic natural water scenes at previous and later points in time using a paired relationship between the time-series hyperspectral imagery and RGB video. The time-series hyperspectral image data was collected using our Headwall Hyperspec micro-HE line-scanning imaging spectrometer integrated into a General Dynamics pan-tilt unit. RGB video data was collected with a low-cost consumer GoPro Hero 8 Black. We detail our data collection methods and characterize the predictions using distributions of absolute and normalized residuals in reflectance spaces. Within visible wavelengths, 95% of the scene is predicted to within 2% absolute reflectance. The normalized error percentage of these residuals translates to approximately 30% of signal level for water spectra. In the near-infrared regime, the normalized error percentage of the residuals sharply increases to approximately 90% for 95% of the scene due to lack of band information from the RGB video imagery of our shallow water scene.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRemote-Sensing Image ClassificationFrench-language works237,207