Multi-Attention-Based Semantic Segmentation Network for Land Cover Remote Sensing Images
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Semantic segmentation is a key technology for remote sensing image analysis widely used in land cover classification, natural disaster monitoring, and other fields. Unlike traditional image segmentation, there are various targets in remote sensing images, with a large feature difference between the targets. As a result, segmentation is more difficult, and the existing models retain low accuracy and inaccurate edge segmentation when used in remote sensing images. This paper proposes a multi-attention-based semantic segmentation network for remote sensing images in order to address these problems. Specifically, we choose UNet as the baseline model, using a coordinate attention-based residual network in the encoder to improve the extraction capability of the backbone network for fine-grained features. We use a content-aware reorganization module in the decoder to replace the traditional upsampling operator to improve the network information extraction capability, and, in addition, we propose a fused attention module for feature map fusion after upsampling, aiming to solve the multi-scale problem. We evaluate our proposed model on the WHDLD dataset and our self-labeled Lu County dataset. The model achieved an mIOU of 63.27% and 72.83%, and an mPA of 74.86% and 84.72%, respectively. Through comparison and confusion matrix analysis, our model outperformed commonly used benchmark models on both datasets.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".