Radiometric normalization of overlapping LiDAR intensity data for reduction of striping noise

ABSTRACT Airborne LiDAR data are usually collected with partially overlapping strips in order to serve a seamless and fine resolution mapping purpose. One of the factors limiting the use of intensity data is the presence of striping noise found in the overlapping region. Though recent researches have proposed physical and empirical approaches for intensity data correction, the effect of striping noise has not yet been resolved. This paper presents a radiometric normalization technique to normalize the intensity data from one data strip to another one with partial overlap. The normalization technique is built based on a second-order polynomial function fitted on the joint histogram plot, which is generated with a set of pairwise closest data points identified within the overlapping region. The proposed method was tested with two individual LiDAR datasets collected by Teledyne Optech's Gemini (1064 nm) and Orion (1550 nm) sensors. The experimental results showed that radiometric correction and normalization can significantly reduce the striping noise found in the overlapping LiDAR intensity data and improve its capability in land cover classification. The coefficient of variation of five selected land cover features was reduced by 19–65%, where a 9–18% accuracy improvement was achieved in different classification scenarios. With the proven capability of the proposed method, both radiometric correction and normalization should be applied as a pre-processing step before performing any surface classification and object recognition.

[1]  C. Hopkinson The influence of flying altitude, beam divergence, and pulse repetition frequency on laser pulse return intensity and canopy frequency distribution , 2007 .

[2]  C. E. Harris,et al.  Laser Radar Systems , 1991 .

[3]  Ahmed Shaker,et al.  Radiometric Correction and Normalization of Airborne LiDAR Intensity Data for Improving Land-Cover Classification , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing.

[4]  Juha Hyyppä,et al.  Radiometric Calibration of LIDAR Intensity With Commercially Available Reference Targets , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing.

[5]  Boris Jutzi,et al.  Investigations on surface reflection models for intensity normalization in airborne laser scanning (ALS) data , 2010 .

[6]  A. Jelalian Laser radar systems , 1980 .

[7]  J. Hyyppä,et al.  Range and AGC normalization in airborne discrete-return LiDAR intensity data for forest canopies , 2010 .

[8]  Xin Huang,et al.  Information fusion of aerial images and LIDAR data in urban areas: vector-stacking, re-classification and post-processing approaches , 2011 .

[9]  Ants Vain,et al.  Use of Naturally Available Reference Targets to Calibrate Airborne Laser Scanning Intensity Data , 2009, Sensors.

[10]  N. Pfeifer,et al.  Correction of laser scanning intensity data: Data and model-driven approaches , 2007 .

[11]  Xuesong Lu,et al.  Mutual information-based multimodal image registration using a novel joint histogram estimation , 2008, Comput. Medical Imaging Graph..

[12]  Jianliang Huang,et al.  Producing more grain with lower environmental costs , 2014, Nature.

[13]  J. Hyyppä,et al.  Tree species classification using airborne LiDAR - effects of stand and tree parameters, downsizing of training set, intensity normalization, and sensor type , 2010 .

[14]  Wolfgang Wagner,et al.  Radiometric calibration of small-footprint full-waveform airborne laser scanner measurements: Basic physical concepts , 2010 .

[15]  Shu Peng,et al.  A web-based system for supporting global land cover data production , 2015 .

[16]  Marc Pollefeys,et al.  Robust Radiometric Calibration and Vignetting Correction , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[17]  Ramin Zabih,et al.  Comparing images using joint histograms , 1999, Multimedia Systems.

[18]  Wai Yeung Yan,et al.  Urban land cover classification using airborne LiDAR data: A review , 2015 .

[19]  Demetrios Gatziolis Dynamic Range-based Intensity Normalization for Airborne, Discrete Return Lidar Data of Forest Canopies , 2011 .

[20]  Steve Mann,et al.  Comparametric equations with practical applications in quantigraphic image processing , 2000, IEEE Trans. Image Process..

[21]  Ana Paula Kersting,et al.  Improving classification accuracy of airborne LiDAR intensity data by geometric calibration and radiometric correction , 2012 .

[22]  Jon P. Mills,et al.  Echo Amplitude Normalization of Full-Waveform Airborne Laser Scanning Data Based on Robust Incidence Angle Estimation , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing.

[23]  Yasuyo Kita,et al.  Change detection using joint intensity histogram , 2006, 18th International Conference on Pattern Recognition (ICPR'06).

[24]  Bostjan Likar,et al.  A Review of Methods for Correction of Intensity Inhomogeneity in MRI , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[25]  Wu Chen,et al.  Combination of overlap-driven adjustment and Phong model for LiDAR intensity correction , 2013 .

[26]  Robert C. Bolles,et al.  Random sample consensus: a paradigm for model fitting with applications to image analysis and automated cartography , 1981, CACM.

[27]  Hannes Isaak Reuter,et al.  An evaluation of void‐filling interpolation methods for SRTM data , 2007, Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci..

[28]  Behnaz Bigdeli,et al.  A Multiple Classifier System for Classification of LIDAR Remote Sensing Data Using Multi-class SVM , 2010, MCS.