Datasets:
gremlin97
/
RemoteSensingCorpus

Dataset card Data Studio Files
xet
 Community
1
text
stringlengths
0
820
cooperation of the services,” European Journal of Remote Sensing ,
vol. 51, no. 1, pp. 572–586, 2018.
[28] D. P. Coppola, Introduction to International Disaster Management .
Elsevier, 2006.
[29] GFDDR, “Post-disaster needs assessments guidelines volume b
housing,” 2017.
[30] H. Shelter, “Settlements guidelines,” 2017.
[31] S. Ben-David, J. Blitzer, K. Crammer, A. Kulesza, F. Pereira, and
J. W. Vaughan, “A theory of learning from different domains,” Machine
learning , vol. 79, no. 1, pp. 151–175, 2010.
[32] D. Tuia, M. V olpi, L. Copa, M. Kanevski, and J. Munoz-Mari, “A
survey of active learning algorithms for supervised remote sensing image
classification,” IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing ,
vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 606–617, 2011.
[33] N. Jojic, N. Malkin, C. Robinson, and A. Ortiz, “From local algorithms
to global results: Human-machine collaboration for robust analysis of
geographically diverse imagery,” in 2021 IEEE International Geoscience
and Remote Sensing Symposium IGARSS . IEEE, 2021, pp. 270–273.
PERSPECTIVES88
IEEE GEOSCIENCE AND REMOTE SENSING MAGAZINE JUNE 2021DEVIS TUIA, RIBANA ROSCHER, JAN DIRK WEGNER, NATHAN JACOBS,
XIAO XIANG ZHU, AND GUSTAU CAMPS-VALLS
In past years, we have witnessed the fields of geosci -
ences and remote sensing and artificial intelligence
(AI) become closer. Thanks to the massive availability
of observational data, improved simulations, and algo -
rithmic advances, these disciplines have found common
objectives and challenges to help advance the modeling
and understanding of the Earth system. Despite such
great opportunities, we have also observed a worrisome
tendency to remain in disciplinary comfort zones, ap -
plying recent advances from AI on well-resolved remote
sensing problems. Here, we take a position on the re -
search directions for which we think the interface be -
tween these fields will have the most significant impact
and become potential game changers. In our declared
agenda for AI in Earth sciences, we aim to inspire re -
searchers, especially the younger generations, to tackle
these challenges for a real advance of remote sensing
and the geosciences.
DATA-DRIVEN APPROACHES IN THE
GEOSCIENCES, THEIR PITFALLS AND
OPPORTUNITIES
AI promises to change the way we do science. To -
day it is widely accepted, and almost a mantra, that
data, along with faster computers and advanced ma -
chine learning (ML) algorithms, can solve any data
science problem. Approaches from ML, computer vi -
sion, applied mathematics, or big data, in general,
are undoubtedly revolutionizing the way we tackle
challenges in remote sensing and geoscience. This is
particularly visible as deep learning has entered the
arena [ 1]: the promise of a technology that can pro -
cess large amounts of data and learn the complex
structures of environmental processes, thus leading
to improved modeling, is making ML an unavoidable approach. For a multidisciplinary overview, see the
work of Camps-Valls et al. [ 2].
We are convinced that the rise of data-driven ap -
proaches in the geosciences is beneficial and will lead to
important discoveries. However, we want to raise aware -
ness of pitfalls and the fundamental questions that are
currently understudied by the community.
The first risk is that of seeing everything as an
opportunity to apply ML and then deploy massive
technology regardless of whether such technology is
necessary and adapted to the problem at hand. Were
that to become common practice, one would miss the
opportunity to use (and improve) such new technol -
ogy to tackle new challenges that could not be solved
without it. For example, remote sensing is a data-hun -
gry discipline that embraced ML very early on: after
an exploratory phase [ 3]–[5], we now see the need for
an impulse to embrace this technology to unlock new,
difficult problems that will, in turn, create value for
these geospatial data. Some of the concepts presented
in this article illustrate these directions (see Table 1 ).
First is the question of introducing reasoning in the al -
gorithms as a way to mimic cognitive processes about
space and time (direction 1 in Table 1 ). Second is the
need for exploring unconventional data modalities to
capture the complexity of the visual world (direction 2
in Table 1 ). And third are the new methods of human
interaction with remote sensing models, for instance,
via question answering as a way to retrieve image con -
tent on demand (direction 3 in Table 1 ).
A second pitfall is the blind faith in data science.
Data science has, regrettably, been a misleading term.
Should it be replaced with “data for science,” as some
researchers have suggested? Science is about contrast -
ing hypotheses, understanding physical phenomena,
and validating causal and explanatory models. If those
objectives were to be achieved through data analysis, a
new science would be born. Toward a Collective Agenda on AI
for Earth Science Data Analysis
Digital Object Identifier 10.1 109/MGRS.2020.3043504
Date of current version: 17 June 2021
Authorized licensed use limited to: ASU Library. Downloaded on March 07,2024 at 22:07:36 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
89
JUNE 2021 IEEE GEOSCIENCE AND REMOTE SENSING MAGAZINEDriven by the impressive results obtained in ML and
computer vision, it is tempting to believe that everything
can be solved using only data and algorithms. We believe