Do we need image classification tags?

Question

After reading What to do about [labeling] and [classification] tags? about labeling and classification, it became clear to me that many, if not most, of the posts on our site about classification relate to image classification.

The current excerpt for the classification tag is:

The process of sorting or arranging entities into groups or categories; on a map, the process of representing members of a group by the same symbol, usually defined in a legend.

While this may relate to image classification, I think it's too broad a definition.

Esri's definition is:

Image classification refers to the task of extracting information classes from a multiband raster image. The resulting raster from image classification can be used to create thematic maps. Depending on the interaction between the analyst and the computer during classification, there are two types of classification: supervised and unsupervised.

Do we need any of the following tags?

• image-classification
• supervised-classification
• unsupervised-classification

Or is it just a matter of redefining our existing classification tag to refer to image classification and remove it from the posts that don't relate to image classification?

Answer 1

image-classification has been used in 13 questions up to now. I think we don't need it because:

• it has not been used frequently until now:
• there is already a great area of overlap with other existing tags: classification, land-classification, land-use, land-cover and digital-image-processing.

Therefore, I propose manually burninating (eliminating) this tag. One less problem trying to organize 'image-classification' tags (if necessary).

Answer 2

It sounds like a rename (via the moderator merge tool) of classification to image-classification would be a quick and easy fix to a large part of the issue identified.

After/before that we just need to disambiguate any questions that are (to be) tagged image-classification and are not about image classification.

One set of questions where classification is used, I think incorrectly, can be identified using https://gis.stackexchange.com/search?q=%5Bclassification%5D+symbology+is%3Aquestion. These questions are about symbol categories and I propose that they should be tagged with symbology and have classification removed.

This answer makes no comment on the case for supervised/unsupervised classification tags because that is an area where I have negligible background.

Answer 3

About supervised-classification and unsupervised-classification:

I think as methods of classifying data they would be useful. My proposal:

• create tags supervised-classification and unsupervised-classification;
• write tag excerpts (briefly explain what they are and how to use them).
• add each tag into 5 to 10 relevant posts (so the tags can stick).

Don't go in a campaign applying massive retaggings (this disrupts the active page). If there is a volunteer this can be done with patience throughout time (5 posts per day, for example).