4.7 Article

Autonomous rock classification using Bayesian image analysis for Rover-based planetary exploration

期刊

COMPUTERS & GEOSCIENCES
卷 83, 期 -, 页码 153-167

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.cageo.2015.05.011

关键词

Autonomous geology; Textural analysis; Bayesian network; Haralick parameter; Planetary exploration; Exploration Rover

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A robust classification system is proposed to support autonomous geological mapping of rocky outcrops using grayscale digital images acquired by a planetary exploration rover. The classifier uses 13 Haralick textural parameters to describe the surface of rock samples, automatically catalogues this information into a 5-bin data structure, computes Bayesian probabilities, and outputs an identification. The system has been demonstrated using a library of 30 digital images of igneous, sedimentary and metamorphic rocks. The images are 3.5 x 3.5 cm(2) in size and composed of 256 x 256 pixels with 256 grayscale levels. They are first converted to gray level co-occurrence matrices which quantify the number of times adjacent pixels of similar intensity are present. The Haralick parameters are computed from these matrices. When all 13 parameters are used, classification accuracy, defined using an empirical scoring system, is 65% due to a large number of false positives. When the number of parameters and the choice of parameter is optimized, classification accuracy increases to 80%. The best results were achieved with 3 parameters that can be interpreted visually (angular second moment, contrast, correlation) together with two statistical parameters (sum of squares variance and difference variance) and a parameter derived from information theory (information measure of correlation II). The system has been kept simple not to draw excessive computational power from the rover. It could, however, be easily extended to handle additional parameters such as images acquired at different wavelengths. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. 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