Table of Links Abstract and Introduction
Backgrounds
Type of remote sensing sensor data
Benchmark remote sensing datasets for evaluating learning models
Evaluation metrics for few-shot remote sensing
Recent few-shot learning techniques in remote sensing
Few-shot based object detection and segmentation in remote sensing
Discussions
Numerical experimentation of few-shot classification on UAV-based dataset
Explainable AI (XAI) in Remote Sensing
Conclusions and Future Directions
Acknowledgements, Declarations, and References Abstract and Introduction Abstract and Introduction Backgrounds Backgrounds Type of remote sensing sensor data Type of remote sensing sensor data Benchmark remote sensing datasets for evaluating learning models Benchmark remote sensing datasets for evaluating learning models Evaluation metrics for few-shot remote sensing Evaluation metrics for few-shot remote sensing Recent few-shot learning techniques in remote sensing Recent few-shot learning techniques in remote sensing Few-shot based object detection and segmentation in remote sensing Few-shot based object detection and segmentation in remote sensing Discussions Discussions Numerical experimentation of few-shot classification on UAV-based dataset Numerical experimentation of few-shot classification on UAV-based dataset Explainable AI (XAI) in Remote Sensing Explainable AI (XAI) in Remote Sensing Conclusions and Future Directions Conclusions and Future Directions Acknowledgements, Declarations, and References Acknowledgements, Declarations, and References 5 Evaluation metrics for few-shot remote sensing task Before delving into the various approaches in a few-shot remote sensing task, we highlight in this section some evaluation metrics that are more suited for few-shot learning task. The data distribution would display some degree of imbalance between the training set and the test set for small-sample size unlike typical learning-based tasks, and hence appropriate metrics addressing such imbalance would need to be invoked. We illustrate in Table 1 the various metrics along with a brief overview. The metrics are the confusion matrix, precision, recall, F1 score, Overall Accuracy (OA), Average Accuracy (AA), Kappa coefficient κ, and PR curve. (5)-(9) mathematically describe some of the metrics as indicated in the respective equations. The variables T P, F P, T N, and F N in the previous equations represent true positive, false positive, true negative, and false negative classes, respectively. In equation (6), Nclasses refers to the total number of classes that are taken into consideration. Authors:
(1) Gao Yu Lee, School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, 50 Nanyang Ave, 639798, Singapore (GAOYU001@e.ntu.edu.sg);
(2) Tanmoy Dam, School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, 65 Nanyang Drive, 637460, Singapore and Department of Computer Science, The University of New Orleans, New Orleans, 2000 Lakeshore Drive, LA 70148, USA (tanmoy.dam@ntu.edu.sg);
(3) Md Meftahul Ferdaus, School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, 50 Nanyang Ave, 639798, Singapore (mferdaus@uno.edu);
(4) Daniel Puiu Poenar, School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, 50 Nanyang Ave, 639798, Singapore (EPDPuiu@ntu.edu.sg);
(5) Vu N. Duong, School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, 65 Nanyang Drive, 637460, Singapore (vu.duong@ntu.edu.sg). Authors: Authors: (1) Gao Yu Lee, School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, 50 Nanyang Ave, 639798, Singapore (GAOYU001@e.ntu.edu.sg); GAOYU001@e.ntu.edu.sg (2) Tanmoy Dam, School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, 65 Nanyang Drive, 637460, Singapore and Department of Computer Science, The University of New Orleans, New Orleans, 2000 Lakeshore Drive, LA 70148, USA (tanmoy.dam@ntu.edu.sg); tanmoy.dam@ntu.edu.sg (3) Md Meftahul Ferdaus, School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, 50 Nanyang Ave, 639798, Singapore (mferdaus@uno.edu); mferdaus@uno.edu (4) Daniel Puiu Poenar, School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, 50 Nanyang Ave, 639798, Singapore (EPDPuiu@ntu.edu.sg); EPDPuiu@ntu.edu.sg (5) Vu N. Duong, School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, 65 Nanyang Drive, 637460, Singapore (vu.duong@ntu.edu.sg). vu.duong@ntu.edu.sg This paper is available on arxiv under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 license. This paper is available on arxiv under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 license. available on arxiv available on arxiv

Part of HackerNoon's growing list of open-source research papers, promoting free access to academic material.

5 Key Metrics to Evaluate Few-Shot Remote Sensing Models

About Author

Comments

TOPICS

THIS ARTICLE WAS FEATURED IN

Related Stories

Untitled Story

6 Breakthrough Few-Shot Learning Techniques for Remote Sensing

How Few-Shot Learning Enhances UAV-Based Image Analysis

Few-Shot vs. One-Shot vs. Zero-Shot Learning

Understanding the 3 Main Types of Remote Sensing Sensor Data

Top Remote Sensing Datasets for Training and Evaluating AI Models

6 Breakthrough Few-Shot Learning Techniques for Remote Sensing

How Few-Shot Learning Enhances UAV-Based Image Analysis

Few-Shot vs. One-Shot vs. Zero-Shot Learning

Understanding the 3 Main Types of Remote Sensing Sensor Data

Top Remote Sensing Datasets for Training and Evaluating AI Models

Light-Mode

Classic

Newspaper

Dark-Mode

Neon Noir

Minty

HN StartUps