Parameterizing Support Vector Machines for Land Cover Classification

The support vector machine is a group of relatively novel statistical learning algorithms that have not been extensively exploited in the remote sensing community. In previous studies they have been found to generally outperform some popular classifiers. Several recent studies found that training samples and input data dimensionalities can affect image classification accuracies by those popular classifiers and support vector machines alike. The current study extends beyond these recent research frameworks and into another important inquiry area addressing the impacts of internal parameterization on the performance of support vector machines for land-cover classification. A set of support vector machines with different combinations of kernel types, parameters, and error penalty are carefully constructed to classify a Landsat Thematic Mapper image into eight major land-cover categories using identical training data. The accuracy of each classified map is further evaluated using identical reference data. The results reveal that kernel types and error penalty can substantially affect the classification accuracy, and that a careful selection of parameter settings can help improve the performance of the support vector classification. These findings reported here can help establish a practical guidance on the use of support vector machines for land-cover classification from remote sensor data.

[1]  Giles M. Foody,et al.  RVM‐based multi‐class classification of remotely sensed data , 2008 .

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

[3]  Giles M. Foody,et al.  Toward intelligent training of supervised image classifications: directing training data acquisition for SVM classification , 2004 .

[4]  Lalit Kumar,et al.  Mapping Coastal Vegetation Using an Expert System and Hyperspectral Imagery , 2004 .

[5]  S. Carpenter,et al.  Global Consequences of Land Use , 2005, Science.

[6]  Andrew K. Skidmore,et al.  Non - parametric test of overlap in multispectral classification , 1988 .

[7]  Ville Heikkinen,et al.  Simulated Multispectral Imagery for Tree Species Classification Using Support Vector Machines , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing.

[8]  J. Mercer Functions of Positive and Negative Type, and their Connection with the Theory of Integral Equations , 1909 .

[9]  Giles M. Foody,et al.  Training set size requirements for the classification of a specific class , 2006 .

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

[11]  Russell G. Congalton,et al.  A review of assessing the accuracy of classifications of remotely sensed data , 1991 .

[12]  Chih-Jen Lin,et al.  Probability Estimates for Multi-class Classification by Pairwise Coupling , 2003, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[13]  Lorenzo Bruzzone,et al.  Classification of hyperspectral remote sensing images with support vector machines , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing.

[14]  J. A. Gomes,et al.  Land cover update by supervised classification of segmented ASTER images , 2005 .

[15]  William J. Emery,et al.  Classification of Very High Spatial Resolution Imagery Using Mathematical Morphology and Support Vector Machines , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing.

[16]  Xiaojun Yang Satellite Monitoring of Urban Spatial Growth in the Atlanta Metropolitan Area , 2002 .

[17]  Fabio Del Frate,et al.  Use of Neural Networks for Automatic Classification From High-Resolution Images , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing.

[18]  Corinna Cortes,et al.  Support-Vector Networks , 1995, Machine Learning.

[19]  C. Lo,et al.  Using a time series of satellite imagery to detect land use and land cover changes in the Atlanta, Georgia metropolitan area , 2002 .

[20]  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 .

[21]  Peijun Li,et al.  Land-cover change detection using one-class support vector machine. , 2010 .

[22]  Lorenzo Bruzzone,et al.  Kernel-based methods for hyperspectral image classification , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing.

[23]  David A. Landgrebe,et al.  A means for utilizing ancillary information in multispectral classification. [of remotely sensed data , 1982 .

[24]  Paul M. Mather,et al.  Assessment of the effectiveness of support vector machines for hyperspectral data , 2004, Future Gener. Comput. Syst..

[25]  B. Turner,et al.  Performance of a neural network: mapping forests using GIS and remotely sensed data , 1997 .

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