MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W619223265

Urban land-cover mapping and change detection with RADARSAT SAR data using neural network and rule-based classifiers

2008· article· en· W619223265 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hongtao Hu, Yifang Ban

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRemote-Sensing Image Classification
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLand coverRemote sensingSupport vector machineSynthetic aperture radarArtificial neural networkImage resolutionSegmentationComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceGeographyPattern recognition (psychology)Land useEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a new approach to extract urban landuse/land-cover information from high-resolution radar satellite data. Fivedate RADARSAT fine-beam SAR images over the rural-urban fringe of the Greater Toronto Area were acquired during May to August in 2002. One scene of Landsat TM imagery was acquired in 1988 for change detection. The major landuse/land-cover classes were high-density built-up areas, low-density built-up areas, roads, forests, parks, golf courses, water and four types of agricultural crops (soybeans, corn, winter wheat/rye and pasture). The proposed approach to classify SAR images consisted of three steps: 1) image segmentation, 2) feature selection and object-based neural network classification, 3) rule set development to improve classification accuracy. Post-classification change detections were then performed using the final classification result of RADARSAT SAR images and the classification result of Landsat TM imagery. The results showed that the proposed approach achieved very good classification accuracy (overall: 87.9%; kappa: 0.867). The change detection procedure was able to identify the areas of significant changes, for example, new built-up areas, even though the overall accuracy of the change detection was not high. 1.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.139 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations13
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRemote-Sensing Image ClassificationFrench-language works237,207