4.6 Article

Multi-stack hybrid CNN with non-monotonic activation functions for hyperspectral satellite image classification

期刊

NEURAL COMPUTING & APPLICATIONS
卷 33, 期 21, 页码 14809-14822

出版社

SPRINGER LONDON LTD
DOI: 10.1007/s00521-021-06120-5

关键词

Convolutional neural network; Non-monotonic activation function; Hyperspectral satellite image and land use land cover classification

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The paper introduces a variant of the 3D-2D CNN Hybrid model for feature extraction in land use land cover classification, aiming to reduce the number of bands and training samples while improving the diversity and accuracy of feature extraction.
The application of deep learning techniques in hyperspectral satellite images (HSI) classification has led to a significant increase in accuracy compared to machine learning techniques. The research objective is now shifted toward gaining classification accuracy with less number of spectral bands and training samples. With this research objective, the recent development of the hybrid convolution neural network (CNN) has resulted in the improvement of the accuracy of land use land cover classification of hyperspectral satellite images (HSI) and also provided a new dimension to explore. This paper proposes a variant of the 3D-2D CNN Hybrid model to extract representational features from a different class of land use land cover using different receptive fields in a multi-stack arrangement. The proposed model focused on reducing the number of bands required for classification and training samples but on the other hand improving the diverse representational feature extraction. The paper also explores through experimentation the possible replacement of monotonic activation function ReLu using non-monotonic functions like Swish and Mish in 3D-2D CNN Hybrid models. The experiments are carried out using publically available HSI datasets with a special focus on small training datasets to establish the efficiency and robustness of the proposed model.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据