Overview of physical models and statistical approaches for weak gaseous plume detection using passive Infrared hyperspectral imagery

Sensors

Volumn 6, Issue 12, 2006, Pages 1721-1750

  Burr, Tom ^a   Hengartner, Nicolas ^a  

^a LOS ALAMOS NATIONAL LABORATORY   (United States)

Author keywords

Clutter; Errors in predictors; Generalized least squares; Infrared; Model averaging; Plume detection; Temperature emissivity separation

Indexed keywords

CLUTTER (INFORMATION THEORY); INFRARED RADIATION; SPECTROSCOPY;

ATMOSPHERIC TRANSMISSIONS; GENERALIZED LEAST SQUARE; HYPER-SPECTRAL IMAGERIES; LONG WAVE INFRARED IMAGERY; MODEL AVERAGING; PLUME DETECTION; SIMPLIFYING ASSUMPTIONS; STATISTICAL APPROACH;

CHEMICAL DETECTION;

EID: 33947389273     PISSN: 14243210     EISSN: 14248220     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3390/s6121721     Document Type: Review

References (52)

1. AVIRIS Free Standard Data Products, Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), http://aviris.jpl.nasa. gov/html/aviris.freedata.html.
2. Vane, G.; Green, R.; Chrien, T.; Enmark, H.; Hansen, E.; Porter, W. The Airborne Visible/Infrared Imaging Spectrometer (AVIRIS), Remote Sensing of the Environment. 1993, 44, 127-143.
3. Bernhardt M.; Heather, J.; Smith, M. New Models for Hyperspectral Anomaly Detection and Un-Mixing, Algorithms and Technologies for Multispectral, Hyperspectral, and Ultraspectral Imagery XII, edited by Sylvia S. Shen, Paul E. Lewis. Proc. SPIE. 2005, 5806, 720-730.
4. Manolakis, D.; Shaw, G. Detection Algorithms for Hyperspectral Imaging Applications. IEEE Signal Processing Magazine. 2002, 19(1), 29-43.
5. Bajorski, P. Analytical Comparison of the Matched Filter and Orthogonal Subspace Projection Detectors in Structured Models for Hyperspectral Images, Algorithms and Technologies for Multispectral, Hyperspectral, and Ultraspectral Imagery XII, edited by Sylvia S. Shen, Paul E. Lewis, Proc. SPIE. 2006, 6233, 1-12.
6. Burr, T.; Fry, H.; McVey, B.; Sander, E. Chemical Identification using Bayesian Model Selection, 2002 Proceedings of the American Statistical Association, Section on Physical and Engineering Sciences[CD-ROM], Ann Arbor, Michigan: American Statistical Association, Los Alamos National Laboratory Unclassified Report, LA-UR-02-7281, available from T. Burr upon request.
7. Heasler, P.; Hylden, J. Technical Letter Report for Non-Linear methods Task: Fits of Nonlinear Bayesian Regressin (NBLR) to Tanasi and Polecat Images, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Official Use Only Report, 2005.
8. Foy, B.; Theiler, J.; Fraser, A. Unreasonable Effectiveness of the Adaptive Matched Filter, to appear in: Proc. MSS (Military Sensing Symposia) Passive Sensors Conference, 2006.
9. Manolakis, D.; Siracusa, C.; Marden, D.; Shaw, G., Hyperspectral Adaptive Matched Filter Detectors: Practical Performance Comparison. Proc. SPIE. 2001, 4381, 18-33.
10. Messinger, D. Gaseous Plume Detection in Hyperspectral Images: a Comparision of Methods, Algorithms and Technologies for Multispectral, Hyperspectral, and Ultraspectral Imagery X. Proc. SPIE. 2004, 5425, 592-603
11. Funk, C.; Theiler, J.; Roberts, D.; Borel, C. Clustering to Improve Matched Filter Detection of Weak Gas Plumes in Hyperspectral Thermal Imagery. IEEE Trans. Geoscience and Remote Sensing. 2001, 39, 1410-1420.
12. Schott, J. Remote Sensing, Oxford Press: New York, 1997.
13. Kealy, P.; Hook, S. Separating Temperature and Emissivity in Thermal Multispectral Scanner Data: Implications for Recovering Land Surface Temperatures. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing. 1993, 31(6): 1155-1164.
14. Lausten, K.; Resmini, R. A New Approach to Infer Surface Emissivity Parameters from Longwave Infrared Hyperspectral Measurements, Algorithms and Technologies for Multispectral, Hyperspectral, and Ultraspectral Imagery XII. Proc. SPIE. 2006, 6233, 1-10.
15. Manolakis, D.; Amico, F. A Taxonomy of Algorithms for Chemical Vapor Detection with Hyperspectral Imaging Spectroscopy. Proc. SPIE. 2005, 5795, 125-133.
16. Theiler, J.; Foy, B.; Fraser, A. Nonlinear Signal contamination Effects for Gaseous Plume Detection in Hyperspectral Imagery, Los Alamos National Laboratory Unclassified Report LAUR-06-1996, to appear. Proc. SPIE. 2007.
17. Foy, B.; Petrin, R.; Quick, R.; Shimada, T.; Tiee, J. Comparisons Between Hyperspectral Passive and Multispectral Active Sensor Measurements. Proc. SPIE. 2002, 4722, 98-109.
18. Theiler, J.; Foy, B.; Fraser, A. Characterizing non-Gaussian Clutter and Detecting Weak Gaseous Plumes in Hyperspectral Imagery, Algorithms and Technologies for Multispectral, Hyperspectral, and Ultraspectral Imagery XI. Proc. SPIE. 2005, 5806, 182-193.
19. McVey, B.; Burr, T.; Fry, H. Distribution of Chemical False Positives for Hyperspectral Image Data, Los Alamos National Laboratory Restricted Release Technical Report LA-CP-02-521, cited with permission, 2003.
20. Manolakis, D.; Marden, D.; Kerekes, J.; Shaw, G. On the Statistics of Hyperspectral Imaging Data. Proc. SPIE. 2001, 4381, 308-316.
21. Marden, D.; Manolakis, D. Using Elliptically Contoured Distributions to Model Hyperspectral Imaging Data and Generate Statistically Similar Synthetic Data. Proc. SPIE. 2004, 5425, 558-572.
22. Marden, D.; Manolakis, D. Modeling Hyperspectral Imaging Data. Proc. SPIE. 2003, 5093, 253-262.
23. Burr, T.; Fry, H.; McVey, B. Characterizing Clutter in the Context of Detecting Weak Gaseous Plumes using the SEBASS Sensor, Los Alamos National Laboratory Restricted Release Report, LA-CP-06-0982, cited with permission, 2006.
24. Mitchell, H.; Jellison, G.; Miller, D.; Salvaggio, C.; Miller, C. The Importance of Background in the Detection and Identification of Gas Plumes Using Emissive Infrared Hyperspectral Sensing. Proc. SPIE. 2003, 5093, 206-217.
25. Sheen, D.; Gallagher, N.; Sharpe, S.; Anderson, K.; Schultz, J. Impact of Background and Atmospheric Variability on Infrared Hyperspectral Chemical Detection Sensitivity. Proc. SPIE. 2003, 5093, 218-229.
26. Clare, P.; Bernhardt, M.; Oxford, W.; Murphy, S.; Godfree, P.; Wilkinson, V. New Approach to Anomaly Detection in Hyperspectral Images, Algorithms and Technologies for Multispectral, Hyperspectral, and Ultraspectral Imagery XII. Proc. SPIE. 2003, 5093, 17-28.
27. Lucey P.; Williams, T.; Mignard, M.; Julian, J.; Kobubun, D.; Allen, G.; Hampton, D.; Schaff, W.; Schlangen, M.; Winter, E.; Kendall, W.; Stocker, A.; Horton, K.; Bowman A. AHI- an Airborne Long Wave Infrared Hyperspectral Imager, Airborne Reconnaissance XXII. Proc. SPIE. 1998, 3431, 36-43.
28. Silverman, B. Density Estimation for Statistics and Data Analysis, 1st Ed, Chapman and Hall Ltd: London and New York, 1986.
29. Garcia-Escudero, L.; Gordaliza, A. Generalized Radius Processes for Elliptically Contoured Distributions. Journal of the American Statistical Association 2005, 100(471), 1036-1045.
30. Manolakis, D.; Rossacci, M.; Cipar, J.; Lockwood, R.; Cooley, T.; Jacobson, J. Statistical Characterization of Natural Hyperspectral Backgrounds Using t-Elliptically Contoured Distributions, Algorithms and Technologies for Multispectral, Hyperspectral, and Ultraspectral Imagery XI. Proc. SPIE. 2005, 5806, 56-65.
31. Miller, B.; Messinger, D. The Effects of Atmospheric Compensation Upon Gaseous Plume Signatures, Algorithms and Technologies for Multispectral, Hyperspectral, and Ultraspectral Imagery XI. Proc. SPIE. 2005, 5806, 229-236.
32. Young, S.; Johnson, B.; Hackwell J. An In-scene Method for Atmospheric Compensation of Thermal Hyperspectral Data. J. Geophys. Res. Atm. 2002, 107, 4774-4774.
33. FASCODE for atmospheric transmission calculations, see http://www.vs.afrl.af.mil/ProductLines/IR-Clutter/fascode.aspx
34. Berk, A.; Bernstein, L.; Robertson, D. MODTRAN: A Moderate Resolution Model for LOWTRAN 7, GL-TR-890122,AD-A214-337, Geophysics Laboratory, Hamscom Air Force Base, Mass, 1989.
35. nd edition, Wiley: New York, 1985.
36. Casella, G.; Moreno, E. Objective Bayesian Variable Selection. Journal of the American Statistical Association 2006, 101 (473), 157-167.
37. Scharf, L. Statistical Signal Processing, Addison-Wesley, New York 1991.
38. Kelly, E. An Adaptive Detection Algorithm. IEEE Trans. Aerospace and Electronic Systems 1986, 22, 115-127.
39. Friedman, J. Regularized Discriminant Analysis. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1989, 84 (405), 165-175.
40. Raftery, A.; Madigan, D.; Hoeting J. Bayesian Model Averaging for Linear Regression Models. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1997, 92, 179-191.
41. Burr, T.; Fry, H.; McVey, B.; Sander, E.; Cavenaugh, J.; Neath, A. Performance of Variable Selection Methods in Regression using Variations of the Bayesian Information Criterion, Los Alamos National Laboratory Unclassified Report LAUR-05-6324, submitted, 2005, available from T. Burr upon request.
42. DiCiccio, T.; Kass, R.; Raftery, A.; Wasserman, L. Computing Bayes Factors by Combining Simulation and Asymptotic Approximations. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1997, 92, 903-915.
43. Kass R.; Raftery, A. Bayes Factors. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1995, 90, 773-795.
44. Harsanyi, J.; Chang, C. Hyperspectral Image Classification and Dimensionality Reduction: an Orthogonal Subspace Projection Approach. IEEE Trans. Geoscience and Remote Sensing. 1994, 32, 779-785.
45. Gallagher, N.; Sheen, D.; Shaver, J.; Wise, B.; Shultz, J. Estimation of Trace Vapor Concentration-Pathlength in Plumes for Remote Sensing Applications From Hyperspectral Images. Proc. SPIE. 2003, 5093, 184-194.
46. Foy, B.; Theiler, J. Scene Analysis and Detection in Thermal Infrared Remote Sensing Using Independent Component Analysis. Proc. SPIE. 2004, 5439, 131-139.
47. Nakariyakul, S.; Casasent, D. Adaptive Branch and Bound Algorithm for Use on Hyperspectral Data, Algorithms and Technologies for Multispectral, Hyperspectral, and Ultraspectral Imagery XI. Proc. SPIE. 2006, 6233, 175-184.
48. Paskaleva, B.; Hayat, M.; Tyo, J.; Wang, Z.; Martinez, M. Feature Selection for Spectral Sensors with Overlapping Noising Spectral Bands, Algorithms and Technologies for Multispectral, Hyperspectral, and Ultraspectral Imagery XI. Proc. SPIE. 2006, 6233, 773-782.
49. Griffin, M.; Czerwinski, R.; Upham, C.; Wack, E.; Burke, H. A Procedure for Embedding Effluent Plumes into LWIR Imagery, Algorithms and Technologies for Multispectral, Hyperspectral, and Ultraspectral Imagery XI. Proc. SPIE. 2005, 5806, 78-87.
50. Carroll, R.; Ruppert, D.; Stefanski, L. Measurement Error in Nonlinear Models, Chapman and Hall, London, 1996.
51. Rousseeuw, P.; van Zomeren, B. Unmasking Multivariate Outliers and Leverage Points (with discussion). Journal of the American Statistical Association 1990, 55(411), 633-651.
52. Johnson, T.; Sams, R.; Sharpe, S. The PNNL Quantitative Infrared DataBase for Gas-Phase Sensing: Spectral Library for Environmental, Hazmat, and Public Safety Standoff Detection, Chemical and Biological Point Sensors for Homeland Defense. Proc. SPIE. 2004, 5269, 159-167.