Drone and ground-truth data collection, image annotation and machine learning: A protocol for coastal habitat mapping and classification
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aerial drone imaging is an efficient tool for mapping and monitoring of coastal habitats at high spatial and temporal resolution. Specifically, drone imaging allows for time- and cost-efficient mapping covering larger areas than traditional mapping and monitoring techniques, while also providing more detailed information than those from airplanes and satellites, enabling for example to differentiate various types of coastal vegetation. Here, we present a systematic method for shallow water habitat classification based on drone imagery. The method includes:•Collection of drone images and creation of orthomosaics.•Gathering ground-truth data in the field to guide the image annotation and to validate the final map product.•Annotation of drone images into - potentially hierarchical - habitat classes and training of machine learning algorithms for habitat classification.As a case study, we present a field campaign that employed these methods to map a coastal site dominated by seagrass, seaweed and kelp, in addition to sediments and rock. Such detailed but efficient mapping and classification can aid to understand and sustainably manage ecologically and valuable marine ecosystems.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it