Effects of random measurements on the performance of target detection in hyperspectral imagery

Hyperspectral pixels are acquired in hundreds of narrow and continuous spectral bands, and the hyperspectral data cubes typically contain hundreds of megabytes. Analysis and processing of the high-dimensional hyperspectral data are computationally expensive and memory inefficient. However, there is a large amount of redundancy between neighboring spectral bands and the hyperspectral pixels lie in a much lower dimensional subspace. Therefore, numerous techniques can be applied to reduce the dimensionality while maintaining the structure of the data. This would lead to a significant reduction of the complexity of the imaging system, as well as an improvement of the computational efficiency of the detection algorithms. In this paper, we explore the use of several dimensionality reduction techniques that can be easily integrated into the imaging sensors. We also investigate their effect on the performance of classical target detection techniques for hyperspectral images, including spectral matched filters (SMF), matched subspace detectors (MSD), support vector machines (SVM), and RX anomaly detection algorithm. Specifically, each N-dimensional spectral pixel is embedded to an M-dimensional measurement space with M « N by a linear transformation (e.g., random measurement matrices, uniform downsampling, PCA). The SMF, MSD, SVM, and RX detectors are then applied to the M-dimensional measurement vectors to detect the targets of interests and their detection performances are compared to those obtained from the entire N-dimensional spectrum by the receiver operating characteristics curves. Through extensive experiments on several HSI datasets, we demonstrate that only 1/5 to 1/3 measurements (i.e., the compression ratio M/N is 1/5 ~ 1/3 ) are necessary to achieve detection performance comparable to that obtained by exploiting the full N-dimensional pixels.

[1]  W. B. Johnson,et al.  Extensions of Lipschitz mappings into Hilbert space , 1984 .

[2]  Ian T. Jolliffe,et al.  Principal Component Analysis , 2002, International Encyclopedia of Statistical Science.

[3]  J. Anthony Gualtieri,et al.  Support vector machines for hyperspectral remote sensing classification , 1999, Other Conferences.

[4]  Nasser M. Nasrabadi,et al.  Automated Hyperspectral Cueing for Civilian Search and Rescue , 2009, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[5]  Optimum Band Selection for Supervised Classification of Multispectral Data , 2007 .

[6]  Guillermo Sapiro,et al.  Spatially Coherent Nonlinear Dimensionality Reduction and Segmentation of Hyperspectral Images , 2007, IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters.

[7]  S. Dutta,et al.  Study of crop growth parameters using Airborne Imaging Spectrometer data , 2001 .

[8]  F. Lehmann,et al.  HyMap hyperspectral remote sensing to detect hydrocarbons , 2001 .

[9]  E. M. Winter,et al.  Anomaly detection from hyperspectral imagery , 2002, IEEE Signal Process. Mag..

[10]  Thomas L. Ainsworth,et al.  Exploiting manifold geometry in hyperspectral imagery , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing.

[11]  Trac D. Tran,et al.  Fast compressive sampling with structurally random matrices , 2008, 2008 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing.

[12]  Richard G. Baraniuk,et al.  The smashed filter for compressive classification and target recognition , 2007, Electronic Imaging.

[13]  S T Roweis,et al.  Nonlinear dimensionality reduction by locally linear embedding. , 2000, Science.

[14]  Tim R. McVicar,et al.  Preprocessing EO-1 Hyperion hyperspectral data to support the application of agricultural indexes , 2003, IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote. Sens..

[15]  J. Tenenbaum,et al.  A global geometric framework for nonlinear dimensionality reduction. , 2000, Science.

[16]  Dimitris Achlioptas,et al.  Database-friendly random projections: Johnson-Lindenstrauss with binary coins , 2003, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[17]  Qian Du,et al.  A joint band prioritization and band-decorrelation approach to band selection for hyperspectral image classification , 1999, IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote. Sens..

[18]  Daniel R. Fuhrmann,et al.  A CFAR adaptive matched filter detector , 1992 .

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

[20]  Robert W. Basedow,et al.  HYDICE system: implementation and performance , 1995, Defense, Security, and Sensing.

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

[22]  Louis L. Scharf,et al.  Matched subspace detectors , 1994, IEEE Trans. Signal Process..

[23]  Bernhard E. Boser,et al.  A training algorithm for optimal margin classifiers , 1992, COLT '92.

[24]  M. Borengasser,et al.  Hyperspectral Remote Sensing: Principles and Applications , 2007 .

[25]  David L Donoho,et al.  Compressed sensing , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory.

[26]  Paul Scheunders,et al.  A band selection technique for spectral classification , 2005, IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters.

[27]  Bernard Chazelle,et al.  Approximate nearest neighbors and the fast Johnson-Lindenstrauss transform , 2006, STOC '06.

[28]  Xiaoli Yu,et al.  Adaptive multiple-band CFAR detection of an optical pattern with unknown spectral distribution , 1990, IEEE Trans. Acoust. Speech Signal Process..

[29]  Dimitris G. Manolakis,et al.  Detection algorithms for hyperspectral imaging applications , 2002, IEEE Signal Process. Mag..

[30]  Emmanuel J. Candès,et al.  Robust uncertainty principles: exact signal reconstruction from highly incomplete frequency information , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory.

[31]  Rebecca Willett,et al.  Hyperspectral target detection from incoherent projections , 2010, 2010 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing.