MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400241491 · doi:10.3390/rs16132427

CVTNet: A Fusion of Convolutional Neural Networks and Vision Transformer for Wetland Mapping Using Sentinel-1 and Sentinel-2 Satellite Data

2024· article· en· W4400241491 on OpenAlexafffund
Mohammad Marjani, Masoud Mahdianpari, Fariba Mohammadimanesh, Eric W. Gill

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLand Use and Ecosystem Services
Canadian institutionsCentre For Cold Ocean Resources EngineeringMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceConvolutional neural networkWetlandRemote sensingArtificial intelligenceLand coverPerceptronMachine learningArtificial neural networkPattern recognition (psychology)Environmental scienceLand useEcologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wetland mapping is a critical component of environmental monitoring, requiring advanced techniques to accurately represent the complex land cover patterns and subtle class differences innate in these ecosystems. This study aims to address these challenges by proposing CVTNet, a novel deep learning (DL) model that integrates convolutional neural networks (CNNs) and vision transformer (ViT) architectures. CVTNet uses channel attention (CA) and spatial attention (SA) mechanisms to enhance feature extraction from Sentinel-1 (S1) and Sentinel-2 (S2) satellite data. The primary goal of this model is to achieve a balanced trade-off between Precision and Recall, which is essential for accurate wetland mapping. The class-specific analysis demonstrated CVTNet’s proficiency across diverse classes, including pasture, shrubland, urban, bog, fen, and water. Comparative analysis showed that CVTNet outperforms contemporary algorithms such as Random Forest (RF), ViT, multi-layer perceptron mixer (MLP-mixer), and hybrid spectral net (HybridSN) classifiers. Additionally, the attention mechanism (AM) analysis and sensitivity analysis highlighted the crucial role of CA, SA, and ViT in focusing the model’s attention on critical regions, thereby improving the mapping of wetland regions. Despite challenges at class boundaries, particularly between bog and fen, and misclassifications of swamp pixels, CVTNet presents a solution for wetland mapping.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.970
Threshold uncertainty score0.396

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations33
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicLand Use and Ecosystem ServicesFrench-language works237,207