An Advanced Data Fusion Method to Improve Wetland Classification Using Multi-Source Remotely Sensed Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The goal of this research was to improve wetland classification by fully exploiting multi-source remotely sensed data. Three distinct classifiers were designed to distinguish individual or compound wetland categories using random forest (RF) classification. They were determined, in part, to best use the available remotely sensed features in order to maximize that information and to maximize classification accuracy. The results from these classifiers were integrated according to Dempster−Shafer theory (D−S theory). The developed method was tested on data collected from a study area in Northern Alberta, Canada. The data utilized were Landsat-8 and Sentinel-2 (multi-spectral), Sentinel-1 (synthetic aperture radar—SAR), and digital elevation model (DEM). Classification of fen, bog, marsh, swamps, and upland resulted in an overall accuracy of 0.93 using the proposed methodology, an improvement of 5% when compared to a traditional classification method based on the aggregated features from these data sources. It was noted that, with the traditional method, some pixels were misclassified with a high level of confidence (>85%). Such misclassification was significantly reduced (by ~10%) by the proposed method. Results also showed that some features important in separating compound wetland classes were not considered important using the traditional method based on the RF feature selection mechanism. When used in the proposed method, these features increased the classification accuracy, which demonstrated that the proposed method provided an effective means to fully employ available data to improve wetland classification.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".