Subpixel Mapping of Multispectral Images Using Markov Random Field With Graph Cut Optimization

This letter presents a novel subpixel mapping method based on Markov random field (MRF) and graph cut optimization. First, the support vector regression is applied to generate the fractional images of classes based on randomly selected training pixels. Second, the spatially adaptive MRF-based subpixel mapping method is adopted to formulate the energy function. Third, to minimize the energy function, graph cut is applied. Finally, the subpixel vector border is extracted and integrated as a weighting function to fine-tune the smoothing parameters. We conduct the experiments on a downsampled SPOT-7 multispectral image and two synthetic images with regular and irregular objects, respectively. The results prove that graph cut can be an alternative method to the commonly used simulated annealing for the energy function optimization in MRF-based subpixel mapping, considering its much higher efficiency and comparable classification accuracy. Moreover, the integration of subpixel edge information is helpful to improve the accuracy of subpixel mapping results.

[1]  Stien Heremans,et al.  Machine learning methods for sub-pixel land-cover classification in the spatially heterogeneous region of Flanders (Belgium): a multi-criteria comparison , 2015 .

[2]  John Trinder,et al.  Fully spatially adaptive smoothing parameter estimation for Markov random field super-resolution mapping of remotely sensed images , 2015 .

[3]  Claudio Delrieux,et al.  Superresolution border segmentation and measurement in remote sensing images , 2012, Comput. Geosci..

[4]  Xiaodong Li,et al.  Spatially adaptive smoothing parameter selection for Markov random field based sub-pixel mapping of remotely sensed images , 2012 .

[5]  Alfred Stein,et al.  Quantification of the Effects of Land-Cover-Class Spectral Separability on the Accuracy of Markov-Random-Field-Based Superresolution Mapping , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing.

[6]  Peter M. Atkinson,et al.  Issues of uncertainty in super-resolution mapping and their implications for the design of an inter-comparison study , 2009 .

[7]  Bernhard Schölkopf,et al.  A tutorial on support vector regression , 2004, Stat. Comput..

[8]  Vladimir Kolmogorov,et al.  An Experimental Comparison of Min-Cut/Max-Flow Algorithms for Energy Minimization in Vision , 2004, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[9]  Olga Veksler,et al.  Fast approximate energy minimization via graph cuts , 2001, Proceedings of the Seventh IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision.

[10]  L. Bastin Comparison of fuzzy c-means classification, linear mixture modelling and MLC probabilities as tools for unmixing coarse pixels , 1997 .

[11]  Aakanksha Rana,et al.  Graph-cut-based model for spectral-spatial classification of hyperspectral images , 2014, 2014 IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium.

[12]  G. Foody Thematic map comparison: Evaluating the statistical significance of differences in classification accuracy , 2004 .

[13]  Chih-Jen Lin,et al.  LIBSVM: A library for support vector machines , 2011, TIST.

[14]  Jon Atli Benediktsson,et al.  SVM- and MRF-Based Method for Accurate Classification of Hyperspectral Images , 2010, IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters.

[15]  Pramod K. Varshney,et al.  Super-resolution land cover mapping using a Markov random field based approach , 2005 .

[16]  S. Lima,et al.  Fully spatially adaptive smoothing parameter estimation for Markov random field super-resolution mapping of remotely sensed images , 2015 .

[17]  Robert De Wulf,et al.  Land cover mapping at sub-pixel scales using linear optimization techniques , 2002 .