MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4372352998 · doi:10.18280/ijdne.180221

A Comparative Study of Land Cover Mapping Based on Support Vector Machine

2023· article· en· W4372352998 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bencheriet Chemesse Ennehar

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRemote-Sensing Image Classification
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgence Thématique de Recherche en Science et Technologie
KeywordsMultispectral imageSupport vector machineLand coverRadial basis functionKernel (algebra)Vegetation (pathology)Pattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceGeographyRadial basis function kernelContextual image classificationRemote sensingComputer sciencePolynomialLand useMathematicsKernel methodImage (mathematics)EngineeringArtificial neural network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The richness of remote sensing images in information, due to the number of bands, makes them widely used in detecting and classifying terrestrial objects.The purpose of this study is a classification of multispectral images for mapping land occupation in the Mohammadia region (located in the west of Algeria).We developed a comparative study on the classification of the study subject image using the three following kernel functions: linear (LN), polynomial (PL), and radial basis function (RBF).After selecting the desired bands of the multispectral image, the training of the SVM is then carried out on the seven interest zones of the studied region: buildings, dense vegetation, sparse vegetation, forest, bare land, and roads.The obtained results are very promising, where the best classification rates were obtained by the use of the RBF kernel (97.91%) and the polynomial kernel (98.79%).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.253 · 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
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Design & Nature and EcodynamicsSame topicRemote-Sensing Image ClassificationFrench-language works237,207