MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4317796315 · doi:10.1109/lgrs.2023.3239263

Local Window Attention Transformer for Polarimetric SAR Image Classification

2023· article· en· W4317796315 on OpenAlexaff
Ali Jamali, Swalpa Kumar Roy, Avik Bhattacharya, Pedram Ghamisi

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and Techniques
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceConvolutional neural networkArtificial intelligenceSynthetic aperture radarTransformerFeature extractionPolarimetryPattern recognition (psychology)Machine learningEngineeringVoltageElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) have recently found great attention in image classification since deep CNNs have exhibited excellent performance in computer vision. Owing to their immense success, of late, scientists are exploring the functionality of transformers in Earth observation applications. Nevertheless, the primary issue with transformers is that they demand significantly more training data than CNN classifiers. Thus, the use of these transformers in remote sensing is considered challenging, notably in utilizing polarimetric synthetic aperture radar (PolSAR) data, due to the insufficient number of existing labeled data. In this letter, we develop and propose a vision transformer (ViT)-based framework that utilizes 3-D and 2-D CNNs as feature extractors and, in addition, local window attention (LWA) for the effective classification of PolSAR data. Extensive experimental results demonstrated that the developed modelPolSARFormerobtained better classification accuracy than the state-of-the-art vision Swin Transformer and FNet algorithms. ThePolSARFormeroutperformed the Swin Transformer and FNet by the margin of 5.86% and 17.63%, in terms of average accuracy (AA) in the San Francisco data benchmark. Moreover, the results over the Flevoland dataset illustrated that thePolSARFormerexceeds several other algorithms, including the ResNet (97.49%), Swin Transformer (96.54%), FNet (95.28%), 2-D CNN (94.57%), and AlexNet (91.83%), with a kappa index (KI) of 99.30%. The code will be made available publicly athttps://github.com/aj1365/PolSARFormer.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.240
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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations84
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing LettersSame topicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and TechniquesFrench-language works237,207