Limitations of Principal Components Analysis for Hyperspectral Target Recognition

Dimensionality reduction is a necessity in most hyperspectral imaging applications. Tradeoffs exist between unsupervised statistical methods, which are typically based on principal components analysis (PCA), and supervised ones, which are often based on Fisher's linear discriminant analysis (LDA), and proponents for each approach exist in the remote sensing community. Recently, a combined approach known as subspace LDA has been proposed, where PCA is employed to recondition ill-posed LDA formulations. The key idea behind this approach is to use a PCA transformation as a preprocessor to discard the null space of rank-deficient scatter matrices, so that LDA can be applied on this reconditioned space. Thus, in theory, the subspace LDA technique benefits from the advantages of both methods. In this letter, we present a theoretical analysis of the effects (often ill effects) of PCA on the discrimination power of the projected subspace. The theoretical analysis is presented from a general pattern classification perspective for two possible scenarios: (1) when PCA is used as a simple dimensionality reduction tool and (2) when it is used to recondition an ill-posed LDA formulation. We also provide experimental evidence of the ineffectiveness of both scenarios for hyperspectral target recognition applications.

[1]  David G. Stork,et al.  Pattern classification, 2nd Edition , 2000 .

[2]  Joydeep Ghosh,et al.  Best-bases feature extraction algorithms for classification of hyperspectral data , 2001, IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote. Sens..

[3]  Johannes R. Sveinsson,et al.  Multisource remote sensing data classification based on consensus and pruning , 2003, IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote. Sens..

[4]  Russell M. Mersereau,et al.  On the impact of PCA dimension reduction for hyperspectral detection of difficult targets , 2005, IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters.

[5]  Lori M. Bruce,et al.  Why principal component analysis is not an appropriate feature extraction method for hyperspectral data , 2003, IGARSS 2003. 2003 IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium. Proceedings (IEEE Cat. No.03CH37477).

[6]  Konstantinos N. Plataniotis,et al.  Regularization studies on LDA for face recognition , 2004, 2004 International Conference on Image Processing, 2004. ICIP '04..

[7]  De-Shuang Huang,et al.  Using FCMC, FVS, and PCA techniques for feature extraction of multispectral images , 2005, IEEE Geosci. Remote. Sens. Lett..

[8]  Jiang Li,et al.  Automated detection of Pueraria montana (kudzu) through Haar analysis of hyperspectral reflectance data , 2001, IGARSS 2001. Scanning the Present and Resolving the Future. Proceedings. IEEE 2001 International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium (Cat. No.01CH37217).

[9]  Juyang Weng,et al.  Using Discriminant Eigenfeatures for Image Retrieval , 1996, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[10]  Saurabh Prasad,et al.  Decision Fusion With Confidence-Based Weight Assignment for Hyperspectral Target Recognition , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing.

[11]  Wenming Zheng,et al.  An efficient algorithm to solve the small sample size problem for LDA , 2004, Pattern Recognit..

[12]  Jieping Ye,et al.  A two-stage linear discriminant analysis via QR-decomposition , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[13]  Avinash C. Kak,et al.  PCA versus LDA , 2001, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..