MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Synthetic Aperture Radar-Based Ship Classification Using CNN and Traditional Handcrafted Features

2023· article· en· W4386920284 on OpenAlex
Ebrahim A. Nehary, Ankita Dey, Sreeraman Rajan, Bhashyam Balaji, Anthony Damini, Rajkumar Chanchlani

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced SAR Imaging Techniques
Canadian institutionsGeneral Dynamics (Canada)Defence Research and Development CanadaCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSynthetic aperture radarComputer scienceRadar imagingRadarRemote sensingArtificial intelligenceInverse synthetic aperture radarSide looking airborne radarBistatic radarGeologyTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ship classification for maritime surveillance is done using satellite-borne synthetic aperture radar (SAR) images that consist of only a small group of bright pixels with noisy background and no proper gradient. Abstract (AB) features obtained using deep learning techniques such as a convolutional neural networks (CNN) alone are insufficient to provide an accurate ship classification. The abstract features (AB) extracted from CNN and common meaningful handcrafted (HC) features such as histogram of oriented gradients (HOG), local binary features (LBF), KAZE features (KF), binary robust invariant scalable keypoints features (BF), and scale-invariant feature transform (SIFT), are combined for ship classification using SAR images. HC features of the two polarizations of SAR images are dimensionally reduced and concatinated. AB and HC features are derived individually from each polarization of the SAR image and the classifier outputs are combined through soft and weighted voting (late fusion). Consolidated AB features are obtained through early fusion of the two polarization images or through mid fusion and then combined with HC features for classification. Experimental results on OpenSARShip dataset demonstrates the effectiveness of fusing HC features with abstract features as the combined feature set outperforms individual (both HC and AB) feature sets. Additionally, it has been observed that both early fusion and late fusion (using weighted voting) yield superior results compared to mid-fusion. The highest accuracy is achieved while combining AB features from early fusion and LBF features, while almost similar accuracy is obtained with weighted voting in late fusion using the same features.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.921
Threshold uncertainty score0.444

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced SAR Imaging TechniquesFrench-language works237,207