4.7 Article

The use of airborne hyperspectral data for tree species classification in a species-rich Central European forest area

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jag.2016.07.018

关键词

Tree species classification; Hyperspectral data; PLS-DA; SVM; RF; Sample selection; Spectral variable selection; CARS

资金

  1. Helmholtz Impulse and Networking Fund through Helmholtz Interdisciplinary Graduate School for Environmental Research (HIGRADE)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The success of remote sensing approaches to assess tree species diversity in a heterogeneously mixed forest stand depends on the availability of both appropriate data and suitable classification algorithms. To separate the high number of in total ten broadleaf tree species in a small structured floodplain forest, the Leipzig Riverside Forest, we introduce a majority based classification approach for Discriminant Analysis based on Partial Least Squares (PLS-DA), which was tested against Random Forest (RF) and Support Vector Machines (SVM). The classifier performance was tested on different sets of airborne hyperspectral image data (AISA DUAL) that were acquired on single dates in August and September and also stacked to a composite product. Shadowed gaps and shadowed crown parts were eliminated via spectral mixture analysis (SMA) prior to the pixel-based classification. Training and validation sets were defined spectrally with the conditioned Latin hypercube method as a stratified random sampling procedure. In the validation, PIS-DA consistently outperformed the RF and SVM approaches on all datasets. The additional use of spectral variable selection (CARS, competitive adaptive reweighted sampling) combined with PLS-DA further improved classification accuracies. Up to 78.4% overall accuracy was achieved for the stacked dataset. The image recorded in August provided slightly higher accuracies than the September image, regardless of the applied classifier. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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