Assessing Annotation Accuracy in Ice Sheets Using Quantitative Metrics
0
🎯
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- The paper evaluates the accuracy of annotations used to label ice sheets in remote sensing data.
- Quantitative metrics are used to assess the quality and consistency of the annotations.
- The research aims to improve the reliability of ice sheet monitoring and analysis.
Plain English Explanation
The paper focuses on assessing the accuracy of annotations used to label ice sheets in satellite or aerial imagery. Accurately identifying and tracking changes in ice sheets is crucial for understanding climate patterns and their impact. However, creating these annotations can be a complex and subjective process.
The researchers used quantitative metrics to evaluate the quality and consistency of the ice sheet annotations. This involved comparing the annotations to a reference dataset to identify any discrepancies or errors. By understanding the limitations and biases in the annotation process, the researchers hope to improve the reliability and usefulness of ice sheet monitoring and analysis.
Technical Explanation
The paper presents a methodology for evaluating the accuracy of annotations used to label ice sheets in remote sensing data. The researchers used a set of quantitative metrics to assess the quality and consistency of the annotations, including measures of spatial overlap, shape similarity, and boundary alignment.
The experiments were conducted on a dataset of ice sheet annotations, where the researchers compared the annotations to a reference dataset to identify any discrepancies or errors. The results showed significant variability in the accuracy of the annotations, with some regions exhibiting higher levels of agreement than others.
The findings highlight the importance of carefully assessing the quality of ice sheet annotations to ensure the reliability of subsequent analyses and applications. The researchers suggest that the proposed metrics can be used to identify areas for improvement in the annotation process and guide the development of more robust and accurate ice sheet monitoring tools.
Critical Analysis
The paper provides a thorough and systematic approach to evaluating the accuracy of ice sheet annotations, which is an important consideration for the reliability of ice sheet monitoring and analysis. However, the researchers acknowledge the limitation of the reference dataset used in the study, which may not fully capture the complexity and variability of real-world ice sheet dynamics.
Additionally, the paper does not address potential biases or inconsistencies in the annotation process itself, such as differences in annotation guidelines, training, or individual annotator expertise. Further research may be needed to understand the sources of variability in the annotation accuracy and develop strategies to improve the consistency and reliability of the process.
Conclusion
This paper presents a valuable approach for assessing the accuracy of ice sheet annotations, which is crucial for improving the reliability and usefulness of remote sensing data in monitoring and analyzing changes in ice sheets. The findings highlight the need for careful evaluation and refinement of the annotation process to ensure that the resulting data can be effectively used to support climate research and decision-making.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
🎯
0
Assessing Annotation Accuracy in Ice Sheets Using Quantitative Metrics
Bayu Adhi Tama, Vandana Janeja, Sanjay Purushotham
The increasing threat of sea level rise due to climate change necessitates a deeper understanding of ice sheet structures. This study addresses the need for accurate ice sheet data interpretation by introducing a suite of quantitative metrics designed to validate ice sheet annotation techniques. Focusing on both manual and automated methods, including ARESELP and its modified version, MARESELP, we assess their accuracy against expert annotations. Our methodology incorporates several computer vision metrics, traditionally underutilized in glaciological research, to evaluate the continuity and connectivity of ice layer annotations. The results demonstrate that while manual annotations provide invaluable expert insights, automated methods, particularly MARESELP, improve layer continuity and alignment with expert labels.
Read more7/16/2024
0
Region-level labels in ice charts can produce pixel-level segmentation for Sea Ice types
Muhammed Patel, Xinwei Chen, Linlin Xu, Yuhao Chen, K Andrea Scott, David A. Clausi
Fully supervised deep learning approaches have demonstrated impressive accuracy in sea ice classification, but their dependence on high-resolution labels presents a significant challenge due to the difficulty of obtaining such data. In response, our weakly supervised learning method provides a compelling alternative by utilizing lower-resolution regional labels from expert-annotated ice charts. This approach achieves exceptional pixel-level classification performance by introducing regional loss representations during training to measure the disparity between predicted and ice chart-derived sea ice type distributions. Leveraging the AI4Arctic Sea Ice Challenge Dataset, our method outperforms the fully supervised U-Net benchmark, the top solution of the AutoIce challenge, in both mapping resolution and class-wise accuracy, marking a significant advancement in automated operational sea ice mapping.
Read more5/20/2024
🏷️
0
Partial Label Learning with Focal Loss for Sea Ice Classification Based on Ice Charts
Behzad Vahedi, Benjamin Lucas, Farnoush Banaei-Kashani, Andrew P. Barrett, Walter N. Meier, Siri Jodha Khalsa, Morteza Karimzadeh
Sea ice, crucial to the Arctic and Earth's climate, requires consistent monitoring and high-resolution mapping. Manual sea ice mapping, however, is time-consuming and subjective, prompting the need for automated deep learning-based classification approaches. However, training these algorithms is challenging because expert-generated ice charts, commonly used as training data, do not map single ice types but instead map polygons with multiple ice types. Moreover, the distribution of various ice types in these charts is frequently imbalanced, resulting in a performance bias towards the dominant class. In this paper, we present a novel GeoAI approach to training sea ice classification by formalizing it as a partial label learning task with explicit confidence scores to address multiple labels and class imbalance. We treat the polygon-level labels as candidate partial labels, assign the corresponding ice concentrations as confidence scores to each candidate label, and integrate them with focal loss to train a Convolutional Neural Network (CNN). Our proposed approach leads to enhanced performance for sea ice classification in Sentinel-1 dual-polarized SAR images, improving classification accuracy (from 87% to 92%) and weighted average F-1 score (from 90% to 93%) compared to the conventional training approach of using one-hot encoded labels and Categorical Cross-Entropy loss. It also improves the F-1 score in 4 out of the 6 sea ice classes.
Read more6/11/2024
0
Performance of Human Annotators in Object Detection and Segmentation of Remotely Sensed Data
Roni Blushtein-Livnon, Tal Svoray, Michael Dorman
This study introduces a laboratory experiment designed to assess the influence of annotation strategies, levels of imbalanced data, and prior experience, on the performance of human annotators. The experiment focuses on labeling aerial imagery, using ArcGIS Pro tools, to detect and segment small-scale photovoltaic solar panels, selected as a case study for rectangular objects. The experiment is conducted using images with a pixel size of 0.15textbf{$m$}, involving both expert and non-expert participants, across different setup strategies and target-background ratio datasets. Our findings indicate that human annotators generally perform more effectively in object detection than in segmentation tasks. A marked tendency to commit more Type II errors (False Negatives, i.e., undetected objects) than Type I errors (False Positives, i.e. falsely detecting objects that do not exist) was observed across all experimental setups and conditions, suggesting a consistent bias in detection and segmentation processes. Performance was better in tasks with higher target-background ratios (i.e., more objects per unit area). Prior experience did not significantly impact performance and may, in some cases, even lead to overestimation in segmentation. These results provide evidence that human annotators are relatively cautious and tend to identify objects only when they are confident about them, prioritizing underestimation over overestimation. Annotators' performance is also influenced by object scarcity, showing a decline in areas with extremely imbalanced datasets and a low ratio of target-to-background. These findings may enhance annotation strategies for remote sensing research while efficient human annotators are crucial in an era characterized by growing demands for high-quality training data to improve segmentation and detection models.
Read more9/24/2024