4.3 Article

Comparison of Matching Algorithms for DSM Generation in Urban Areas from Ikonos Imagery

Journal

PHOTOGRAMMETRIC ENGINEERING AND REMOTE SENSING
Volume 76, Issue 9, Pages 1041-1050

Publisher

AMER SOC PHOTOGRAMMETRY
DOI: 10.14358/PERS.76.9.1041

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The extraction of the third dimension from remote sensing data is a well known technique Since in a number of countries aerial images and laser scanner data am unavailable, expensive or classified. stereoscopic high-resolution optical satellite images provide a viable alternative for generating digital surface and digital terrain models. Especially the automatic extraction of highly accurate 3D surface models in urban areas is still a very complicated task due to occlusions, large differences in height and the variety of objects and surface material. In this paper on analysis and a visual and quantitative comparison of three different matching algorithms for generating urban DSMS based on very high-resolution satellite images is presented. The three algorithms am least squares matching (ism) in a region growing fashion, dynamic programming.; (DP) and semiglobal matching (SGM) The characteristics of the three algorithms as applied to four different Ikonos stereo pairs with a ground sampling distance of 1 m are shown. The following results were obtained: visually. in the ism results the shape of the buildings is considerably smoothed While in the DP results the building shape is sharper, only little detail is visible on the building roofs, and streaking along the epipolar lines causes problems. With SGM more details can be extracted and the results visually have the best quality. Based on reference data for the different test sites, the standard deviation of the building heights determined by LSM and DP IS in the range of one pixel or slightly better, while it is in the range of half a pixel for SGM

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available