4.7 Article

DDFormer: A Dual-Domain Transformer for Building Damage Detection Using High-Resolution SAR Imagery

期刊

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/LGRS.2023.3288007

关键词

Building damage detection; deep learning; dual-domain; synthetic aperture radar (SAR); transformer

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This letter proposes a dual-domain transformer (DDFormer) semantic segmentation model for damaged buildings detection using a single post-earthquake high-resolution SAR image. The DDFormer achieves optimal detection accuracy with mean intersection over union (mIoU) and F-Score of 81.81% and 90%, respectively. In addition, the results are highly consistent with the Turkey Earthquake Report published by Microsoft with a correlation coefficient of 0.626, demonstrating the robustness and effectiveness of DDFormer.
Earthquakes are catastrophic in terms of damage to buildings. Synthetic aperture radar (SAR) has emerged as an effective tool to respond to seismic hazards. However, pre- and post-event high-resolution data are not always available for the affected areas, and the complex geometric properties of buildings pose a challenge to building damage detection. Therefore, this letter proposes the dual-domain transformer (DDFormer) semantic segmentation model for damaged buildings detection using a single post-earthquake high-resolution SAR image. The difference between intact and collapsed building features is enhanced by adaptive frequency and spatial modules. Taking the 2023 Turkey earthquake as an example, the experiments are conducted on two high-resolution co-polarized SAR data (Capella and GF-3). The DDFormer achieves optimal detection accuracy with mean intersection over union (mIoU) and F-Score of 81.81% and 90%, respectively. In addition, our results are in high consistent with the Turkey Earthquake Report published by Microsoft with a correlation coefficient of 0.626. The above experiments demonstrate the robustness and effectiveness of DDFormer.

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