Next Article in Journal
Feasibility of Invasive Grass Detection in a Desertscrub Community Using Hyperspectral Field Measurements and Landsat TM Imagery
Next Article in Special Issue
Object-Based Image Analysis of Downed Logs in Disturbed Forested Landscapes Using Lidar
Previous Article in Journal
Monitoring Urban Tree Cover Using Object-Based Image Analysis and Public Domain Remotely Sensed Data
Previous Article in Special Issue
Automatic Geographic Object Based Mapping of Streambed and Riparian Zone Extent from LiDAR Data in a Temperate Rural Urban Environment, Australia
Open AccessArticle

Machine Learning Comparison between WorldView-2 and QuickBird-2-Simulated Imagery Regarding Object-Based Urban Land Cover Classification

1
German Remote Sensing Data Center (DFD), DLR, Oberpfaffenhofen, D-82234 Weßling, Germany
2
Remote Sensing Division (DSR), National Institute for Space Research (INPE), Sao Jose dos Campos, SP-12227-010, Brazil
3
Department of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, Technische Universitaet Muenchen (TUM), D-80333 Munich, Germany
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Remote Sens. 2011, 3(10), 2263-2282; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs3102263
Received: 19 August 2011 / Revised: 14 October 2011 / Accepted: 14 October 2011 / Published: 21 October 2011
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Object-Based Image Analysis)
The objective of this study is to compare WorldView-2 (WV-2) and QuickBird-2-simulated (QB-2) imagery regarding their potential for object-based urban land cover classification. Optimal segmentation parameters were automatically found for each data set and the obtained results were quantitatively compared and discussed. Four different feature selection algorithms were used in order to verify to which data set the most relevant object-based features belong to. Object-based classifications were performed with four different supervised algorithms applied to each data set and the obtained accuracies and model performances indexes were compared. Segmentation experiments carried out involving bands exclusively available in the WV-2 sensor generated segments slightly more similar to our reference segments (only about 0.23 discrepancy). Fifty seven percent of the different selected features and 53% of all the 80 selections refer to features that can only be calculated with the additional bands of the WV-2 sensor. On the other hand, 57% of the most relevant features and 63% of the second most relevant features can also be calculated considering only the QB-2 bands. In 10 out of 16 classifications, higher Kappa values were achieved when features related to the additional bands of the WV-2 sensor were also considered. In most cases, classifications carried out with the 8-band-related features generated less complex and more efficient models than those generated only with QB-2 band-related features. Our results lead to the conclusion that spectrally similar classes like ceramic tile roofs and bare soil, as well as asphalt and dark asbestos roofs can be better distinguished when the additional bands of the WV-2 sensor are used throughout the object-based classification process. View Full-Text
Keywords: urban remote sensing; high spatial resolution; feature selection; image segmentation; image classification urban remote sensing; high spatial resolution; feature selection; image segmentation; image classification
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Novack, T.; Esch, T.; Kux, H.; Stilla, U. Machine Learning Comparison between WorldView-2 and QuickBird-2-Simulated Imagery Regarding Object-Based Urban Land Cover Classification . Remote Sens. 2011, 3, 2263-2282.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Only visits after 24 November 2015 are recorded.
Search more from Scilit
 
Search
Back to TopTop