Integrating User Needs on Misclassification Error Sensitivity into Image Segmentation Quality Assessment

Abstract Commonly the assessment of the quality of image segmentations used in object-based land cover classification uses the geometric match between the derived segmentation and a reference dataset. This paper argues that a more appropriate assessment of a segmentation is to also consider the thematic content of the objects generated. This allows the assessment to be tailored to the needs of the specific user. A new method for image segmentation quality assessment is described, which combines a traditional geometric-only method with the thematic similarity index (TSI), a metric that expresses the degree of thematic quality of objects from a user’s perspective. The perspectives of two users (a wolf researcher and a general user of land cover information) were adopted in a case study to demonstrate the new method. The results show that the new method allowed the production of more accurate land cover classifications for the two users than the use of the geometric-only approach.

[1]  Cornelia Gläßer,et al.  A framework for the geometric accuracy assessment of classified objects , 2013 .

[2]  Yan Gao,et al.  Optimal region growing segmentation and its effect on classification accuracy , 2011 .

[3]  R. Nosofsky Attention, similarity, and the identification-categorization relationship. , 1986, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[4]  L. Durieux,et al.  Advances in Geographic Object-Based Image Analysis with ontologies: A review of main contributions and limitations from a remote sensing perspective , 2013 .

[5]  Stefan W. Maier,et al.  Area-based and location-based validation of classified image objects , 2014, Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinformation.

[6]  Jean-François Mas,et al.  Change Estimates by Map Comparison: A Method to Reduce Erroneous Changes Due to Positional Error , 2005, Trans. GIS.

[7]  M. Gahegan,et al.  Probing the Relationship Between Classification Error and Class Similarity , 2005 .

[8]  Lalit Kumar,et al.  Comparative assessment of the measures of thematic classification accuracy , 2007 .

[9]  P. C. Smits,et al.  QUALITY ASSESSMENT OF IMAGE CLASSIFICATION ALGORITHMS FOR LAND-COVER MAPPING , 1999 .

[10]  Thomas Blaschke,et al.  Geographic Object-Based Image Analysis – Towards a new paradigm , 2014, ISPRS journal of photogrammetry and remote sensing : official publication of the International Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing.

[11]  Y. J. Zhang,et al.  A survey on evaluation methods for image segmentation , 1996, Pattern Recognit..

[12]  P. Gong,et al.  Accuracy Assessment Measures for Object-based Image Segmentation Goodness , 2010 .

[13]  A. Tversky Features of Similarity , 1977 .

[14]  Martin Volk,et al.  The comparison index: A tool for assessing the accuracy of image segmentation , 2007, Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinformation.

[15]  G. Foody Classification accuracy comparison: hypothesis tests and the use of confidence intervals in evaluations of difference, equivalence and non-inferiority , 2009 .

[16]  Sietse O. Los,et al.  Implications of land-cover misclassification for parameter estimates in global land-surface models: An example from the simple biosphere model (SiB2) , 1999 .

[17]  Bernadette Bouchon-Meunier,et al.  Towards general measures of comparison of objects , 1996, Fuzzy Sets Syst..

[18]  Leila Maria Garcia Fonseca,et al.  GeoDMA - Geographic Data Mining Analyst , 2013, Comput. Geosci..

[19]  S. V. Stehman,et al.  Comparing thematic maps based on map value , 1999 .

[20]  James R. Anderson,et al.  A land use and land cover classification system for use with remote sensor data , 1976 .