Beyond Supervised Learning in Remote Sensing: A Systematic Review of Deep Learning Approaches
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An increasing availability of remote sensing data in the era of geo big-data makes producing well-represented, reliable training data to be more challenging and requires an excessive amount of human labor. In addition, the rapid increase in graphics processing unit (GPU) processing power has enabled the development of advanced deep learning (DL) algorithms, which achieve impressive results in the field of satellite image processing. However, they require a huge and comprehensive training dataset to avoid overfitting problems and to represent a generalizable model. Thus, moving toward the development of non-supervised deep learning (NSDL) models in different remote sensing applications is an inevitable need. To provide an initial response to that need, this paper performs a comprehensive review and systematic meta-analysis of recently published research articles focusing on the applications of NSDL for remote sensing data processing. In order to identify future research directions and formulate recommendations, we extract trends and highlight interesting approaches from this large body of literature. Consequently, current challenges, prospects, and recommendations are also discussed to uncover the trend. According to the results, there is a sharp increasing trend in the applicability of NSDL methods during these few years particularly, with the advent of new deep architectures, such as adversarial, graph, and transformer models. As a result, this review paper discusses different remote sensing data processing applications and challenges that can be addressed using NSDL approaches.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".