Effect of coregistration error on patchy target detection using high-resolution imagery

Remote Sensing of Environment

Volumn 112, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 845-850

  Weber, Keith T ^a   Théau, Jérôme ^a   Serr, Kindra ^a  

^a IDAHO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Classification accuracy; Coregistration; Field sites; Patchy targets; Positional accuracy; QuickBird

Indexed keywords

SATELLITE IMAGERY; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

CLASSIFICATION ACCURACY; HIGH RESOLUTION IMAGERY; PATCHY TARGETS; POSITIONAL ACCURACY;

TARGET TRACKING;

ACCURACY ASSESSMENT; CLASSIFICATION; DETECTION METHOD; IMAGE RESOLUTION; PATCHINESS; SPATIAL RESOLUTION;

EID: 39749184235     PISSN: 00344257     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.rse.2007.06.016     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. th international symposium on spatial accuracy assessment in natural resources and environmental sciences, Lisbon, Portugal (2006) 3-17
2. Chavez P.S. Image based atmospheric corrections - Revisited and improved. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 62 (1996) 1025-1036
3. Cheng P., Toutin T., Zhang Y., and Wood M. QuickBird - Geometric correction, path and block processing and data fusion. Earth Observation Magazine's (EOM) (May 2003) 1-10
4. Cohen J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement 20 (1960) 37-46
5. Congalton R.G., and Green K. Assessing the accuracy of remotely sensed data: Principles and practices (1999), Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton
6. Dai X., and Khorram S. The effects of image misregistration on the accuracy of remotely sensed change detection. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 36 (1998) 1566-1577
7. Foody G.M. On the compensation for chance agreement in image classification accuracy assessment. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 58 (1992) 1459-1460
8. Foody G.M., and Arora M.K. An evaluation of some factors affecting the accuracy of classification by an artificial neural network. International Journal of Remote Sensing 18 (1997) 799-810
9. Goodchild M.F., Biging G.S., Congalton R.G., Langley P.G., Chrisman N.R., and Davis F.W. Final report of the accuracy assessment task force. California Assembly Bill AB1580 (1994), University of California, National Center for Geographic Information and Analysis (NCGIA), Santa Barbara
10. Lillesand T.M., and Kiefer R.W. Remote sensing and image interpretation. 4th Ed. (2000), John Wiley and Sons, New York
11. Mas J.F. Reducing positional error in spatio-temporal analyses. Proceedings, 7th international symposium on spatial accuracy assessment in natural resources and environmental sciences, Lisbon, Portugal (2006) 281-285
12. Mehner H., Cutler M., Fairbairn D., and Thompson G. Remote sensing of upland vegetation: The potential of high spatial resolution satellite sensors. Global Ecology and Biogeography 13 (2004) 359-369
13. Monserud R., and Leemans R. Comparing global vegetation maps with the kappa statistic. Ecological Modeling 62 (1992) 275-293
14. Mundt J.T., Glenn N.F., Weber K.T., and Pettingill J. Determining target detection limits and accuracy delineation using an incremental technique. Remote Sensing of Environment 105 (2006) 34-40
15. Parcharidis I., Foumelis M., Papageorgiou E., Segou M., and Sakkas V. Orthorectification and assessment of QuickBird imagery using D-GPS measurements over paros urban area. Proceedings, international society for photogrammetry and remote sensing 2005. (2005), Joint Conference, Tucson, Arizona, USA
16. Peleg K., and Anderson G.L. FFT regression and cross-noise reduction for comparing images in remote sensing. International Journal of Remote Sensing 23 (2002) 2097-2124
17. Pontius R.G. Quantification error versus location error in comparison of categorical maps. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 66 (2000) 1011-1016
18. Richards J.A. Remote sensing digital image analysis (1986), Springer-Verlag, Berlin
19. Robertson B.C. Rigorous modeling and correction of quickbird imagery. Proceedings, IEEE international geoscience and remote sensing symposium (IGARSS ′03) (2003), France, Toulouse 797-802
20. Roy D.P. The impacts of misregistration upon composited wide field of view satellite data and implications for change detection. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 38 (2000) 2017-2032
21. Sanchez R.D., and Kooyman G.L. Advanced systems data for mapping emperor penguin habitats in Antarctica USGS Open-File Report 2004-1379 (2004)
22. Serr K., Windholz T.K., and Weber K.T. Comparing GPS receivers: A field study. URISA Journal 18 (2006) 19-24
23. Stow D.A. Reducing the effects of misregistration on pixel-level change detection. International Journal of Remote Sensing 20 (1999) 2477-2483
24. Titus K., Mosher J.A., and Williams B.K. Chance-corrected classification for use in discriminant analysis: Ecological applications. The American Midland Naturalist 111 (1984) 1-7
25. Toutin T., and Chenier R. GCP requirement for high-resolution satellite mapping. Proceedings, international society for photogrammetry and remote sensing 2004 congress, Istanbul, Turkey (2004)
26. Townshend J.R.G., Justice C.O., Gurney C., and McManus J. The impact of misregistration on change detection. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 30 (1992) 1054-1060
27. Verbyla D.L., and Boles S.H. Bias in land cover change estimates due to misregistration. International Journal of Remote Sensing 21 (2000) 3553-3560
28. Wang H., and Ellis E.C. Image misregistration error in change measurements. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 71 (2005) 1037-1044
29. Weber K.T. Challenges of integrating geospatial technologies into rangeland research and management. Rangeland Ecology and Management 59 (2006) 38-43
30. Weber K.T., Glenn N.F., Mundt J.T., and Gokhale B. A comparison between multi-spectral and hyperspectral platforms for early detection of leafy spurge in southeastern Idaho. In: Weber K.T. (Ed). Final report: Detection, prediction, impact, and management of invasive plants using GIS (2006) 185-196. http://giscenter.isu.edu/research/techpg/nasa_weeds/pdf/multi_vs_hyper.pdf (URL http://giscenter.isu.edu/research/techpg/nasa_weeds/pdf/multi_vs_hyper.pdf, visited 20-Jun-2007)
31. Wijnant J., and Steenberghen T. Per-parcel classification of urban ikonos imagery. Proceedings, 7th AGILE conference on geographic information science, Heraklion, Greece (2004) 447-455