MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385888027 · doi:10.55274/r0011045

L52194 Detection of Third Party Encroachment Using Satellite Based Remote Sensing Technologies

2015· report· en· W4385888027 on OpenAlexaff
Puestow

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSatellite Image Processing and Photogrammetry
Canadian institutionsCentre For Cold Ocean Resources Engineering
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSatelliteComputer scienceRemote sensingConstant false alarm rateReal-time computingProcess (computing)Service (business)Scale (ratio)Field (mathematics)Artificial intelligenceGeographyEngineeringCartographyAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Building on past experience, it was the objective of this investigation to automate the satellite-based detection of encroachment events, to improve target detection and reduce false alarms using radar and optical imagery and to investigate the integration of one-call services into the process flow. Algorithm development for target detection using optical imagery was carried out with the intention to facilitate the future integration of unmanned airborne vehicle (UAV) technology into the process. The capacity of the multitemporal algorithm was extended to enable the detection of area changes in addition to vehicle targets. The integration of existing notification services in the satellite-based approach was examined. A satellite-based encroachment monitoring system is now in place to undertake large-scale field demonstrations over 100 to 200 miles of right-of-way for a period of several months, preceded by a pre-service calibration phase of several weeks to adjust the procedures to local conditions. A constant false alarm rate between 5 and 10% can be achieved after a service period of 8 to 10 months.

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)0.001
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSatellite Image Processing and PhotogrammetryFrench-language works237,207