A Comprehensive Survey of Deep Learning in Remote Sensing: Theories, Tools and Challenges for the Community

In recent years, deep learning (DL), a re-branding of neural networks (NNs), has risen to the top in numerous areas, namely computer vision (CV), speech recognition, natural language processing, etc. Whereas remote sensing (RS) possesses a number of unique challenges, primarily related to sensors and applications, inevitably RS draws from many of the same theories as CV; e.g., statistics, fusion, and machine learning, to name a few. This means that the RS community should be aware of, if not at the leading edge of, of advancements like DL. Herein, we provide the most comprehensive survey of state-of-the-art RS DL research. We also review recent new developments in the DL field that can be used in DL for RS. Namely, we focus on theories, tools and challenges for the RS community. Specifically, we focus on unsolved challenges and opportunities as it relates to (i) inadequate data sets, (ii) human-understandable solutions for modelling physical phenomena, (iii) Big Data, (iv) non-traditional heterogeneous data sources, (v) DL architectures and learning algorithms for spectral, spatial and temporal data, (vi) transfer learning, (vii) an improved theoretical understanding of DL systems, (viii) high barriers to entry, and (ix) training and optimizing the DL.Comment: 64 pages, 411 references. To appear in Journal of Applied Remote Sensin

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

SpaceNet MVOI: a Multi-View Overhead Imagery Dataset

Detection and segmentation of objects in overheard imagery is a challenging task. The variable density, random orientation, small size, and instance-to-instance heterogeneity of objects in overhead imagery calls for approaches distinct from existing models designed for natural scene datasets. Though new overhead imagery datasets are being developed, they almost universally comprise a single view taken from directly overhead ("at nadir"), failing to address a critical variable: look angle. By contrast, views vary in real-world overhead imagery, particularly in dynamic scenarios such as natural disasters where first looks are often over 40 degrees off-nadir. This represents an important challenge to computer vision methods, as changing view angle adds distortions, alters resolution, and changes lighting. At present, the impact of these perturbations for algorithmic detection and segmentation of objects is untested. To address this problem, we present an open source Multi-View Overhead Imagery dataset, termed SpaceNet MVOI, with 27 unique looks from a broad range of viewing angles (-32.5 degrees to 54.0 degrees). Each of these images cover the same 665 square km geographic extent and are annotated with 126,747 building footprint labels, enabling direct assessment of the impact of viewpoint perturbation on model performance. We benchmark multiple leading segmentation and object detection models on: (1) building detection, (2) generalization to unseen viewing angles and resolutions, and (3) sensitivity of building footprint extraction to changes in resolution. We find that state of the art segmentation and object detection models struggle to identify buildings in off-nadir imagery and generalize poorly to unseen views, presenting an important benchmark to explore the broadly relevant challenge of detecting small, heterogeneous target objects in visually dynamic contexts.Comment: Accepted into IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) 201

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

Using high resolution optical imagery to detect earthquake-induced liquefaction: the 2011 Christchurch earthquake

Using automated supervised methods with satellite and aerial imageries for liquefaction mapping is a promising step in providing detailed and region-scale maps of liquefaction extent immediately after an earthquake. The accuracy of these methods depends on the quantity and quality of training samples and the number of available spectral bands. Digitizing a large number of high-quality training samples from an event may not be feasible in the desired timeframe for rapid response as the training pixels for each class should be typical and accurately represent the spectral diversity of that specific class. To perform automated classification for liquefaction detection, we need to understand how to build the optimal and accurate training dataset. Using multispectral optical imagery from the 22 February, 2011 Christchurch earthquake, we investigate the effects of quantity of high-quality training pixel samples as well as the number of spectral bands on the performance of a pixel-based parametric supervised maximum likelihood classifier for liquefaction detection. We find that the liquefaction surface effects are bimodal in terms of spectral signature and therefore, should be classified as either wet liquefaction or dry liquefaction. This is due to the difference in water content between these two modes. Using 5-fold cross-validation method, we evaluate performance of the classifier on datasets with different pixel sizes of 50, 100, 500, 2000, and 4000. Also, the effect of adding spectral information was investigated by adding once only the near infrared (NIR) band to the visible red, green, and blue (RGB) bands and the other time using all available 8 spectral bands of the World-View 2 satellite imagery. We find that the classifier has high accuracies (75%–95%) when using the 2000 pixels-size dataset that includes the RGB+NIR spectral bands and therefore, increasing to 4000 pixels-size dataset and/or eight spectral bands may not be worth the required time and cost. We also investigate accuracies of the classifier when using aerial imagery with same number of training pixels and either RGB or RGB+NIR bands and find that the classifier accuracies are higher when using satellite imagery with same number of training pixels and spectral information. The classifier identifies dry liquefaction with higher user accuracy than wet liquefaction across all evaluated scenarios. To improve classification performance for wet liquefaction detection, we also investigate adding geospatial information of building footprints to improve classification performance. We find that using a building footprint mask to remove them from the classification process, increases wet liquefaction user accuracy by roughly 10%.Published versio