4.7 Article

Robust multitask learning with three-dimensional empirical mode decomposition-based features for hyperspectral classification

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2016.08.007

关键词

Hyperspectral image (HSI); Classification; Three-dimensional empirical mode decomposition (3D-EMD); Multitask learning; Sparse; Low-rank

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41501368, 41522104, 41531178]
  2. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [161gpy04, 151gjc24]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Empirical mode decomposition (EMD) and its variants have recently been applied for hyperspectral image (HSI) classification due to their ability to extract useful features from the original HSI. However, it remains a challenging task to effectively exploit the spectral-spatial information by the traditional vector or image-based methods. In this paper, a three-dimensional (3D) extension of EMD (3D-EMD) is proposed to naturally treat the HSI as a cube and decompose the HSI into varying oscillations (i.e. 3D intrinsic mode functions (3D-IMFs)). To achieve fast 3D-EMD implementation, 3D Delaunay triangulation (3D-DT) is utilized to determine the distances of extrema, while separable filters are adopted to generate the envelopes. Taking the extracted 3D-IMFs as features of different tasks, robust multitask learning (RMTL) is further proposed for HSI classification. In RMTL, pairs of low-rank and sparse structures are formulated by trace-norm and l(1,2)-norm to capture task relatedness and specificity, respectively. Moreover, the optimization problems of RMTL can be efficiently solved by the inexact augmented Lagrangian method (IALM). Compared with several state-of-the-art feature extraction and classification methods, the experimental results conducted on three benchmark data sets demonstrate the superiority of the proposed methods. (C) 2016 International Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, Inc. (ISPRS). Published by 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