Comparison of Pixel and Object Oriented Based Classification of Hyperspectral Pansharpened Images

In this paper pixel-based and object-oriented classifications were investigated for land-cover mapping in an urban area. Since the image fusion methods are playing a useful role in supplying classification different fusion approaches such as Gram-Schmidt Transform (GS), Principal Component Transform (PC), Haar wavelet, and À Trous Wavelet Transform (ATWT) algorithms have been used and the fused image with the best quality has been assessed on its respected classification. A Hyperion image and IRS-PAN image covering a region near Tehran, Iran have been used to demonstrate the enhancement and accuracy assessment of fused image over the initial images. The evaluation results of fused images showed that the Haar wavelet approach has good quality in preserving spectral information as well as spatial information. Classification results were compared to evaluate the effectiveness of the two classification approaches. Result of the pan-sharpened image classifications displayed that the object-oriented procedure presented more accurate outcomes (90.47 %) than those obtained by pixel-based classification method (77.33 %).

[1]  Stefano Pignatti,et al.  Evaluating Hyperion capability for land cover mapping in a fragmented ecosystem : Pollino National Park, Italy , 2009 .

[2]  Sergio Teggi,et al.  TM and IRS-1C-PAN data fusion using multiresolution decomposition methods based on the 'a tròus' algorithm , 2003 .

[3]  Qihao Weng,et al.  Remote Sensing Sensors and Applications in Environmental Resources Mapping and Modelling , 2007, Sensors.

[4]  F. Sarmadian.  Comparisons of Object-Oriented and Pixel-Based Classification of Land Use/Land Cover Types Based on Lansadsat7, Etm + Spectral Bands (Case Study: Arid Region of Iran) , 2007 .

[5]  Xu Han-qiu.  Study on Data Fusion and Classification of Landsat 7 ETM + Imagery , 2005 .

[6]  Wei Zheng,et al.  Classification of colonic tissues using near-infrared Raman spectroscopy and support vector machines. , 2008, International journal of oncology.

[7]  Jocelyn Chanussot,et al.  Decision Fusion for the Classification of Hyperspectral Data: Outcome of the 2008 GRS-S Data Fusion Contest , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing.

[8]  D. Flanders,et al.  Preliminary evaluation of eCognition object-based software for cut block delineation and feature extraction , 2003 .

[9]  Manfred Ehlers,et al.  Performance of evaluation methods in image fusion , 2009, 2009 12th International Conference on Information Fusion.

[10]  Qiming Zhou,et al.  Automated rangeland vegetation cover and density estimation using ground digital images and a spectral-contextual classifier , 2001 .

[11]  Patil Gaurav Jaywantrao,et al.  Application of Image Fusion Using Wavelet Transform In Target Tracking System , 2012 .

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

[13]  Jyoti Sarup,et al.  Image fusion techniques for accurate classification of Remote Sensing data , 2011 .

[14]  Zhilin Li,et al.  Effects of image fusion algorithms on classification accuracy , 2010, 2010 18th International Conference on Geoinformatics.

[15]  George P. Petropoulos,et al.  Hyperion hyperspectral imagery analysis combined with machine learning classifiers for land use/cover mapping , 2012, Expert Syst. Appl..

[16]  Thomas Blaschke,et al.  Object-oriented image analysis and scale-space: Theory and methods for modeling and evaluating multi-scale landscape structure , 2001 .

[17]  J. Zhou,et al.  A wavelet transform method to merge Landsat TM and SPOT panchromatic data , 1998 .