MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7134176301 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.18907329

AI-Aided Satellite Imagery for Land Use Mapping and Monitoring in Benin: A Computational Perspective

2010· article· en· W7134176301 on OpenAlexaff
Tchinda Atohoun, Koffi Adjaï, Gabriel Agbéyamo

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRemote-Sensing Image Classification
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSatellite imageryPerspective (graphical)SatelliteConvolutional neural networkSupport vector machineLand use

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Satellite imagery plays a crucial role in land use mapping and monitoring due to its ability to capture large-scale landscapes with high spatial resolution. A hybrid machine learning approach combining convolutional neural networks (CNNs) with support vector machines (SVMs) was employed. The CNN extracts features from satellite images, while SVM is used for classification tasks. The AI model achieved a classification accuracy of 92% on the validation dataset, demonstrating significant improvement over traditional methods. This study validates the effectiveness of AI in improving land use mapping and monitoring using satellite imagery, providing valuable insights for environmental management and policy-making. Further research should focus on integrating real-time data sources to enhance operational efficiency and address temporal dynamics in land use changes. AI, Satellite Imagery, Land Use Monitoring, Benin Model estimation used $\hat{\theta}=argmin_{\theta}\sum_i\ell(y_i,f_\theta(x_i))+\lambda\lVert\theta\rVert_2^2$, with performance evaluated using out-of-sample error.

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)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MINDSame topicRemote-Sensing Image ClassificationFrench-language works237,207