Learning Method for In-Situ Soil Classification Based on Texture Characteristics

Knowing the nature of a soil through its classification is a key step in understanding its behaviour. In addition to its mechanical properties, information on soil type is important for forecasting material behaviour. This requires laboratory tests that are often long and expensive. Our approach is a development of in-situ identification tests used to complement “blind” mechanical tests. A new method is proposed for obtaining in-situ soil classification based on the use of geo-endoscopy and image analysis. This technique is based on the computation of texture features in geoendoscopic images and, more particularly, second order statistical features. After a presentation of the goals of this research, this article presents the methodology proposed and the learning steps performed to achieve these goals. The second part describes the testing and selection of major textural features according to their performances and their discriminating capacities. In the last part the classification results obtained with this methodology are presented. Soil image classification has been tested successfully and achieves accuracy of over 80 % in classifying natural soil samples. Because of the fixed magnification of the camera, results presented here are strongly linked to this magnification.

[1]  Noboru Yasuda,et al.  Subsurface Soil-Geology Interpolation Using Fuzzy Neural Network , 2000 .

[2]  David A Clausi An analysis of co-occurrence texture statistics as a function of grey level quantization , 2002 .

[3]  Xiaoou Tang,et al.  Texture information in run-length matrices , 1998, IEEE Trans. Image Process..

[4]  Patrice Aknin,et al.  Comparison of Supervised Self-Organizing Maps Using Euclidian or Mahalanobis Distance in Classification Context , 2001, IWANN.

[5]  Sakae Shibusawa,et al.  Textural analysis of soil images to quantify and characterize the spatial variation of soil properties using a real-time soil sensor , 2006, Precision Agriculture.

[6]  J. Blasco,et al.  Comparison of three algorithms in the classification of table olives by means of computer vision , 2004 .

[7]  James F. Greenleaf,et al.  Use of gray value distribution of run lengths for texture analysis , 1990, Pattern Recognit. Lett..

[8]  Belur V. Dasarathy,et al.  Image characterizations based on joint gray level-run length distributions , 1991, Pattern Recognit. Lett..

[9]  Pierre Breul,et al.  In Field Soil Characterization: Approach Based on Texture Image Analysis , 2006 .

[10]  Petros Maragos,et al.  Soil image segmentation and texture analysis: a computer vision approach , 2005, IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters.

[11]  Defix,et al.  REMBLAYAGE DES TRANCHEES ET REFECTION DES CHAUSSEES - GUIDE TECHNIQUE , 1994 .

[12]  Roman D. Hryciw,et al.  Wavelet Analysis of Soil Mass Images for Particle Size Determination , 2004 .

[13]  Thomas S. Huang,et al.  Image processing , 1971 .

[14]  Mary M. Galloway,et al.  Texture analysis using gray level run lengths , 1974 .

[15]  Robert M. Haralick,et al.  Textural Features for Image Classification , 1973, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern..

[16]  Malcolm C. Thomas,et al.  Sand grain analysis—image processing, textural algorithms and neural nets , 1998 .

[17]  Richard W. Conners,et al.  A Theoretical Comparison of Texture Algorithms , 1980, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[18]  Raphaël Rouveure Caracterisation de l'etat de surface du sol a courte distance par des techniques micro-ondes. Application a la mesure de la rugosite d'un sol agricole , 2001 .

[19]  Scott Allan Raschke Computer vision for experimental soil micromechanics and soil characterization. , 1996 .

[20]  Ramon E. Vasquez,et al.  ML parameter estimation and minimum distance classifier for texture analysis using wavelet transform , 1997 .