How to Learn More? Exploring Kolmogorov–Arnold Networks for Hyperspectral Image Classification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) and vision transformers (ViTs) have shown excellent capability in complex hyperspectral image (HSI) classification. However, these models require a significant number of training data and are computational resources. On the other hand, modern Multi-Layer Perceptrons (MLPs) have demonstrated a great classification capability. These modern MLP-based models require significantly less training data compared with CNNs and ViTs, achieving state-of-the-art classification accuracy. Recently, Kolmogorov–Arnold networks (KANs) were proposed as viable alternatives for MLPs. Because of their internal similarity to splines and their external similarity to MLPs, KANs are able to optimize learned features with remarkable accuracy, in addition to being able to learn new features. Thus, in this study, we assessed the effectiveness of KANs for complex HSI data classification. Moreover, to enhance the HSI classification accuracy obtained by the KANs, we developed and proposed a hybrid architecture utilizing 1D, 2D, and 3D KANs. To demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed KAN architecture, we conducted extensive experiments on three newly created HSI benchmark datasets: QUH-Pingan, QUH-Tangdaowan, and QUH-Qingyun. The results underscored the competitive or better capability of the developed hybrid KAN-based model across these benchmark datasets over several other CNN- and ViT-based algorithms, including 1D-CNN, 2DCNN, 3D CNN, VGG-16, ResNet-50, EfficientNet, RNN, and ViT.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".