MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409787584 · doi:10.61091/jcmcc127a-267

Automated Classification and Change Detection of Remote Sensing Images Based on Convolutional Neural Networks

2025· article· en· W4409787584 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicRemote Sensing and Land Use
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsConvolutional neural networkChange detectionComputer scienceArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Remote sensingGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to better realize the automatic classi ication and change detection of remote sensing images, this paper proposes an automatic remote sensing image classi ication model based on CNN and migration learning, and constructs a remote sensing image change detection model by combining CNN and Transformer network.In the remote sensing image classi ication model, DenseNet network and Inception network are used as the backbone network, combined with the new channel attention module to mine the image features of remote sensing images, and then realize the accurate classi ication of remote sensing images.In the remote sensing image change detection model, the convolution operation of CNN with different sizes of void rate and expansion rate is utilized to better guide the feature map to focus on local information.Combined with the dynamic deformable Transformer to provide more accurate remote sensing image location information and detail information, to reduce the impact of background interference on remote sensing image change detection, and to improve the model's ability to recognize the target of remote sensing images.The parameter count and loating-point computation of the remote sensing image classi ication model are 7.69MB and 1.89GB, respectively, which are smaller than the parameter count and loating-point computation of the single network model.The RSICD models mF1 and mIoU are 1.66% and 0.58% higher than the optimal ones.Through the effective integration of convolutional neural networks and many different types of deep learning techniques, automated classi ication and change detection of remote sensing images can be realized.

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)0.001
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 score0.961
Threshold uncertainty score0.547

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial ComputingSame topicRemote Sensing and Land UseFrench-language works237,207