Remote Sensing and Land Use Extraction for Kernel Functions Analysis by Support Vector Machines with ASTER Multispectral Imagery

Land use is being considered as an element in determining land change studies, environmental planning and natural resource applications. The Earth’s surface Study by remote sensing has many benefits such as, continuous acquisition of data, broad regional coverage, cost effective data, map accurate data, and large archives of historical data. To study land use / cover, remote sensing as an efficient technology, is always desired by experts. In this case, classification could be considered as one of the most important methods of extracting information from digital satellite images. Selecting the best classification method and applying the proper values for parameters extremely influence the trust level of extracted land use maps. This research is an applied study which attempts to introduce Support Vector Machines (SVM) classification method, a recent development from the machine learning community. Moreover, we prove its potential for structure–activity relationship analysis on Aster multispectral data of central county of Kabodar-Ahang region in Hamedan, Iran. Accuracy of SVMs method is varied by the type of kernel functions and its parameters. The purpose of this research is to find the accuracy of Land use extraction by SVM method by Polynomial and radial basis functions kernel with their estimated optimum parameters in addition to compare the results with Maximum Likelihood method. Most of the scientists imply that Maximum Likelihood method is suitable for classification. Therefore, we try to compare SVM with ML method and to deliberate the efficiency of this new method in classification progress on Aster multispectral data. The accuracy of SVM method by Polynomial and radial basis functions kernel with optimum parameters and ML classification methods achieved 93.18%, 91.77% and 88.35 % respectively as an overall accuracy. By comparing the accuracy of these methods, SVM method by Polynomial kernel was evaluated as suitable. Therefore, we can suggest using SVM method especially with the use of Polynomial kernel to determine land use. In general, the results of this research are very practical in natural resources conservation planning and studies. Also, this study verifies the effectiveness and robustness of SVMs in the classification of remotely sensed images.

[1]  Giles M. Foody,et al.  A relative evaluation of multiclass image classification by support vector machines , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing.

[2]  S. Prasher,et al.  Application of support vector machine technology for weed and nitrogen stress detection in corn , 2006 .

[3]  Vladimir N. Vapnik,et al.  The Nature of Statistical Learning Theory , 2000, Statistics for Engineering and Information Science.

[4]  S. M. Jong,et al.  Remote Sensing Image Analysis: Including The Spatial Domain , 2011 .

[5]  Latif Kalin,et al.  Modelling effects of land use/cover changes under limited data , 2011 .

[6]  Thomas R. Loveland,et al.  Land-use Pressure and a Transition to Forest-cover Loss in the Eastern United States , 2010 .

[7]  Richard A. Wadsworth,et al.  What is Land Cover? , 2005 .

[8]  George P. Petropoulos,et al.  Burnt area delineation from a uni-temporal perspective based on Landsat TM imagery classification using Support Vector Machines , 2011, Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinformation.

[9]  Hiroaki Kuze,et al.  Performance Analyzing of High Resolution Pan-sharpening Techniques: Increasing Image Quality for Classification using Supervised Kernel Support Vector Machine , 2011 .

[10]  Thomas Blaschke,et al.  Land cover change assessment using decision trees, support vector machines and maximum likelihood classification algorithms , 2010, Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinformation.

[11]  Patrick Hostert,et al.  Land cover mapping of large areas using chain classification of neighboring Landsat satellite images , 2009 .

[12]  L. Boschetti,et al.  Combining ASTER multispectral imagery analysis and support vector machines for rapid and cost-effective post-fire assessment: a case study from the Greek wildland fires of 2007 , 2010 .

[13]  Chih-Jen Lin,et al.  Asymptotic Behaviors of Support Vector Machines with Gaussian Kernel , 2003, Neural Computation.

[14]  Hassiba Nemmour,et al.  Multiple support vector machines for land cover change detection: An application for mapping urban extensions , 2006 .

[15]  Benjamin Koetz,et al.  Multi-source land cover classification for forest fire management based on imaging spectrometry and LiDAR data , 2008 .

[16]  Taskin Kavzoglu,et al.  A kernel functions analysis for support vector machines for land cover classification , 2009, Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinformation.

[17]  John A. Richards,et al.  Remote Sensing Digital Image Analysis: An Introduction , 1999 .

[18]  Qian Du,et al.  Improving urban land use and land cover classification from high-spatial-resolution hyperspectral imagery using contextual information , 2010 .

[19]  Giles M. Foody,et al.  The use of small training sets containing mixed pixels for accurate hard image classification: Training on mixed spectral responses for classification by a SVM , 2006 .

[20]  K. Solaimani,et al.  Investigation of land use changes on soil erosion process using geographical information system , 2009 .

[21]  Ming-Hseng Tseng,et al.  A genetic algorithm rule-based approach for land-cover classification , 2008 .

[22]  Bogdan Zagajewski,et al.  MAPPING HIGH MOUNTAIN VEGETATION USING HYPERSPECTRAL DATA , 2005 .

[23]  Edwin T. Engman,et al.  Status of remote sensing algorithms for estimation of land surface state parameters , 1995 .

[24]  S. Nautiyal,et al.  Patterns and Implications of Land Use/Cover Change , 2002 .

[25]  Alexander Siegmund,et al.  Automatic land cover analysis for Tenerife by supervised classification using remotely sensed data , 2003 .

[26]  P. Aplin,et al.  Consistency Analysis of Multi-Source Remotely Sensed Images for Land Cover Classification , 2008 .

[27]  Paul M. Mather,et al.  Support vector machines for classification in remote sensing , 2005 .

[28]  Charalabos Ioannidis,et al.  Supervised Change Detection on Simulated Data employing Support Vector Machines , 2010 .

[29]  M. D. Craig,et al.  Analysis of aircraft spectrometer data with logarithmic residuals , 1985 .

[30]  Martin Brown,et al.  Support vector machines for optimal classification and spectral unmixing , 1999 .

[31]  Chih-Jen Lin,et al.  A Practical Guide to Support Vector Classication , 2008 .

[32]  F. S. Al-Ahmadi,et al.  Comparison of four classification methods to extract land use and land cover from raw satellite images for some remote arid areas, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. , 2009 .

[33]  William H. Anderson,et al.  EVALUATION OF FACTORS AFFECTING SUPPORT VECTOR MACHINES FOR HYPERSPECTRAL CLASSIFICATION , 2004 .

[34]  R. Bos,et al.  Application of remote sensing. , 1990, Parasitology today.

[35]  L. S. Davis,et al.  An assessment of support vector machines for land cover classi(cid:142) cation , 2002 .

[36]  E. E. Hardy,et al.  A land-use classification system for use with remote sensor data , 1972 .

[37]  T. M. Lillesand,et al.  Remote Sensing and Image Interpretation , 1980 .

[38]  Thomas Blaschke,et al.  Object based image analysis for remote sensing , 2010 .

[39]  C. Prakasam,et al.  Land use and land cover change detection through remote sensing approach: a case study of Kodaikanal Taluk, Tamil Nadu. , 2010 .