Deep learning in remote sensing: a review

Standing at the paradigm shift towards data-intensive science, machine learning techniques are becoming increasingly important. In particular, as a major breakthrough in the field, deep learning has proven as an extremely powerful tool in many fields. Shall we embrace deep learning as the key to all? Or, should we resist a 'black-box' solution? There are controversial opinions in the remote sensing community. In this article, we analyze the challenges of using deep learning for remote sensing data analysis, review the recent advances, and provide resources to make deep learning in remote sensing ridiculously simple to start with. More importantly, we advocate remote sensing scientists to bring their expertise into deep learning, and use it as an implicit general model to tackle unprecedented large-scale influential challenges, such as climate change and urbanization.Comment: Accepted for publication IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Magazin

A Framework for Land Cover Classification Using Discrete Return LiDAR Data: Adopting Pseudo-Waveform and Hierarchical Segmentation

Acquiring current, accurate land-use information is critical for monitoring and understanding the impact of anthropogenic activities on natural environments.Remote sensing technologies are of increasing importance because of their capability to acquire information for large areas in a timely manner, enabling decision makers to be more effective in complex environments. Although optical imagery has demonstrated to be successful for land cover classification, active sensors, such as light detection and ranging (LiDAR), have distinct capabilities that can be exploited to improve classification results. However, utilization of LiDAR data for land cover classification has not been fully exploited. Moreover, spatial-spectral classification has recently gained significant attention since classification accuracy can be improved by extracting additional information from the neighboring pixels. Although spatial information has been widely used for spectral data, less attention has been given to LiDARdata. In this work, a new framework for land cover classification using discrete return LiDAR data is proposed. Pseudo-waveforms are generated from the LiDAR data and processed by hierarchical segmentation. Spatial featuresare extracted in a region-based way using a new unsupervised strategy for multiple pruning of the segmentation hierarchy. The proposed framework is validated experimentally on a real dataset acquired in an urban area. Better classification results are exhibited by the proposed framework compared to the cases in which basic LiDAR products such as digital surface model and intensity image are used. Moreover, the proposed region-based feature extraction strategy results in improved classification accuracies in comparison with a more traditional window-based approach

Pixel Classification of SAR ice images using ANFIS-PSO Classifier

Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) is playing a vital role in taking extremely high resolution radar images. It is greatly used to monitor the ice covered ocean regions. Sea monitoring is important for various purposes which includes global climate systems and ship navigation. Classification on the ice infested area gives important features which will be further useful for various monitoring process around the ice regions. Main objective of this paper is to classify the SAR ice image that helps in identifying the regions around the ice infested areas. In this paper three stages are considered in classification of SAR ice images. It starts with preprocessing in which the speckled SAR ice images are denoised using various speckle removal filters; comparison is made on all these filters to find the best filter in speckle removal. Second stage includes segmentation in which different regions are segmented using K-means and watershed segmentation algorithms; comparison is made between these two algorithms to find the best in segmenting SAR ice images. The last stage includes pixel based classification which identifies and classifies the segmented regions using various supervised learning classifiers. The algorithms includes Back propagation neural networks (BPN), Fuzzy Classifier, Adaptive Neuro Fuzzy Inference Classifier (ANFIS) classifier and proposed ANFIS with Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) classifier; comparison is made on all these classifiers to propose which classifier is best suitable for classifying the SAR ice image. Various evaluation metrics are performed separately at all these three stages

Object-based image analysis for forest-type mapping in New Hampshire

The use of satellite imagery to classify New England forests is inherently complicated due to high species diversity and complex spatial distributions across a landscape. The use of imagery with high spatial resolutions to classify forests has become more commonplace as new satellite technology become available. Pixel-based methods of classification have been traditionally used to identify forest cover types. However, object-based image analysis (OBIA) has been shown to provide more accurate results. This study explored the ability of OBIA to classify forest stands in New Hampshire using two methods: by identifying stands within an IKONOS satellite image, and by identifying individual trees and building them into forest stands. Forest stands were classified in the IKONOS image using OBIA. However, the spatial resolution was not high enough to distinguish individual tree crowns and therefore, individual trees could not be accurately identified to create forest stands. In addition, the accuracy of labeling forest stands using the OBIA approach was low. In the future, these results could be improved by using a modified classification approach and appropriate sampling scheme more reflective of object-based analysis

What a MESS: Multi-Domain Evaluation of Zero-Shot Semantic Segmentation

While semantic segmentation has seen tremendous improvements in the past, there is still significant labeling efforts necessary and the problem of limited generalization to classes that have not been present during training. To address this problem, zero-shot semantic segmentation makes use of large self-supervised vision-language models, allowing zero-shot transfer to unseen classes. In this work, we build a benchmark for Multi-domain Evaluation of Semantic Segmentation (MESS), which allows a holistic analysis of performance across a wide range of domain-specific datasets such as medicine, engineering, earth monitoring, biology, and agriculture. To do this, we reviewed 120 datasets, developed a taxonomy, and classified the datasets according to the developed taxonomy. We select a representative subset consisting of 22 datasets and propose it as the MESS benchmark. We evaluate eight recently published models on the proposed MESS benchmark and analyze characteristics for the performance of zero-shot transfer models. The toolkit is available at https://github.com/blumenstiel/MESS

Assessing the role of EO in biodiversity monitoring: options for integrating in-situ observations with EO within the context of the EBONE concept

The European Biodiversity Observation Network (EBONE) is a European contribution on terrestrial monitoring to GEO BON, the Group on Earth Observations Biodiversity Observation Network. EBONE’s aims are to develop a system of biodiversity observation at regional, national and European levels by assessing existing approaches in terms of their validity and applicability starting in Europe, then expanding to regions in Africa. The objective of EBONE is to deliver: 1. A sound scientific basis for the production of statistical estimates of stock and change of key indicators; 2. The development of a system for estimating past changes and forecasting and testing policy options and management strategies for threatened ecosystems and species; 3. A proposal for a cost-effective biodiversity monitoring system. There is a consensus that Earth Observation (EO) has a role to play in monitoring biodiversity. With its capacity to observe detailed spatial patterns and variability across large areas at regular intervals, our instinct suggests that EO could deliver the type of spatial and temporal coverage that is beyond reach with in-situ efforts. Furthermore, when considering the emerging networks of in-situ observations, the prospect of enhancing the quality of the information whilst reducing cost through integration is compelling. This report gives a realistic assessment of the role of EO in biodiversity monitoring and the options for integrating in-situ observations with EO within the context of the EBONE concept (cfr. EBONE-ID1.4). The assessment is mainly based on a set of targeted pilot studies. Building on this assessment, the report then presents a series of recommendations on the best options for using EO in an effective, consistent and sustainable biodiversity monitoring scheme. The issues that we faced were many: 1. Integration can be interpreted in different ways. One possible interpretation is: the combined use of independent data sets to deliver a different but improved data set; another is: the use of one data set to complement another dataset. 2. The targeted improvement will vary with stakeholder group: some will seek for more efficiency, others for more reliable estimates (accuracy and/or precision); others for more detail in space and/or time or more of everything. 3. Integration requires a link between the datasets (EO and in-situ). The strength of the link between reflected electromagnetic radiation and the habitats and their biodiversity observed in-situ is function of many variables, for example: the spatial scale of the observations; timing of the observations; the adopted nomenclature for classification; the complexity of the landscape in terms of composition, spatial structure and the physical environment; the habitat and land cover types under consideration. 4. The type of the EO data available varies (function of e.g. budget, size and location of region, cloudiness, national and/or international investment in airborne campaigns or space technology) which determines its capability to deliver the required output. EO and in-situ could be combined in different ways, depending on the type of integration we wanted to achieve and the targeted improvement. We aimed for an improvement in accuracy (i.e. the reduction in error of our indicator estimate calculated for an environmental zone). Furthermore, EO would also provide the spatial patterns for correlated in-situ data. EBONE in its initial development, focused on three main indicators covering: (i) the extent and change of habitats of European interest in the context of a general habitat assessment; (ii) abundance and distribution of selected species (birds, butterflies and plants); and (iii) fragmentation of natural and semi-natural areas. For habitat extent, we decided that it did not matter how in-situ was integrated with EO as long as we could demonstrate that acceptable accuracies could be achieved and the precision could consistently be improved. The nomenclature used to map habitats in-situ was the General Habitat Classification. We considered the following options where the EO and in-situ play different roles: using in-situ samples to re-calibrate a habitat map independently derived from EO; improving the accuracy of in-situ sampled habitat statistics, by post-stratification with correlated EO data; and using in-situ samples to train the classification of EO data into habitat types where the EO data delivers full coverage or a larger number of samples. For some of the above cases we also considered the impact that the sampling strategy employed to deliver the samples would have on the accuracy and precision achieved. Restricted access to European wide species data prevented work on the indicator ‘abundance and distribution of species’. With respect to the indicator ‘fragmentation’, we investigated ways of delivering EO derived measures of habitat patterns that are meaningful to sampled in-situ observations