Urban land-cover mapping and change detection with RADARSAT SAR data using neural network and rule-based classifiers
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
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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