PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT OF OBJECT DETECTION FROM MULTI SATELLITES AND AERIAL IMAGES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Object detection in remote sensing imagery plays an important role in many applications, such as tracking and change detection. With the development of deep learning algorithms and advancement in hardware systems, improved accuracies have been achieved in the detection of various objects from remote sensing images. However, object detection across heterogeneous remote sensing imagery remains an important issue, particularly for satellite and aerial imagery. The colour variation for the same ground objects, variable resolutions, different platform heights, the parallax effect, and image distortion brought on by diverse shooting angles are the biggest hurdles in satellite-aerial detection applications. The research aims to obtain successful model for detecting aircrafts from satellite and aerial images and reduce cost and the gap of revisit time between sensors. The networks were tested using aerial, GF-2, Jilin-1 (JL-1) and Pleiades satellites test sets after being trained individually using the RGB high-resolution aerial set and panchromatic low-resolution GF-2 satellite set to validate the efficiency of the trained models. Also, the aerial-trained model and GF-2 satellite-trained model as dedicated models were compared with each other, and model trained by all dataset for Object Detection in Aerial Images (DOTA). It is observed that the anchor sizes and augmentation methods can enhance the performance of detection models. k-means algorithm and data augmentation were applied to produce better anchor box selection and avoid overfitting, atmospheric conditions problems, respectively. The accuracy assessment results demonstrate that the aerial-trained model outperforms the GF-2 satellite-trained model. In addition, the results of two dedicated detection models show improved accuracy compared to the DOTA-trained model.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".