Thematic accuracy assessment of geographic object-based image classification

International Journal of Geographical Information Science

Volumn 25, Issue 6, 2011, Pages 895-911

  Radoux, J ^a   Bogaert, P ^a   Fasbender, D ^b   Defourny, P ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ CATHOLIQUE DE LOUVAIN   (Belgium)

^b CENTRE EAU TERRE ENVIRONNEMENT   (Canada)

Author keywords

Geobia; Image object; Overall accuracy; Quality assessment; Validation

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY ASSESSMENT; ERROR ANALYSIS; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE CLASSIFICATION; IMAGE PROCESSING; PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT; PIXEL; QUICKBIRD; SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION;

GEOBIA;

EID: 79960692760     PISSN: 13658816     EISSN: 13623087     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/13658816.2010.498378     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Baatz, M. and Schäpe, A., 2000. Multiresolution segmentation - an optimization approach for high quality multi-scale image segmentation. In: J. Strobl, T. Blaschke, and G. Griesebner, eds. Angewandte geographische informationsverarbeitung XII Heidelberg:Wichmann-Verlag, 12-23.
2. Bian, L., 2003. The representation of the environment in the context of individual-based modeling. Ecological Modelling, 159 (2-3), 279-296.
3. Bian, L., 2007. Object-oriented representation of environmental phenomena: is everything best represented as an object?. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 97 (2), 267-281.
4. Blaschke, T., Lang, S., and Hay, G.J., 2008. Object-based image analysis: spatial concepts for knowledge driven remote sensing applications. 1st Lecture notes in geoinformation and cartography, Berlin: Springer.
5. Bontemps, S., et al., 2008. An object-based change detection method accounting for temporal dependencies in time series with medium to coarse spatial resolution. Remote Sensing of Environment, 112, 3181-3191.
6. Carleer, A.P., Debeir, O., and Wolff, E., 2005. Assessment of very high spatial resolution satellite image segmentations. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing, 71 (11), 1285-1294.
7. Congalton, R.G., 1988. Using spatail autocorrelation analysis to explore the errors in maps generated from remotely sensed data. Photogrammetric engineering and remote sensing, 54 (5), 587-592.
8. Congalton, R.G., 1991. A review of assessing the accuracy of classification of remotely sensed data. Remote Sensing of Environment, 37 (1), 35-46.
9. Congalton, R.G. and Green, K., 1993. A practical look at the sources of confusion in error matrix generation. Photogrammetric engineering and remote sensing, 59 (5), 641-644.
10. Congalton, R.G. and Green, K., 2009. Assessing the accuracy of remotely sensed data: principles and practices. 2nd ed. London: Taylor and Francis.
11. Desclée, B., Bogaert, P., and Defourny, P., 2006. Forest change detection by statistical object-based method. Remote Sensing of Environment, 102 (1-2), 1-11.
12. Di Gregorio, A. and Jansen, L.J.M., 2000. Land cover classification system (LCCS): classification concepts and user manual. GCP/RAF/287/ITA Africover-East Africa Project and Soil Resources, Management and Conservation Service, Food and Agriculture Organization, 209 pp.
13. Foody, G.M., 1996. Approaches for the production and evaluation of fuzzy land cover classification from remotely-sensed data. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 17 (7), 1317-1340.
14. Foody, G.M., 2002. Status of land cover classification accuracy assessment. Remote Sensing of Environment, 80, 185-201.
15. Franklin, S.E., et al., 1991. Pixel sampling of remotely sensed digital imagery. Computers Geosciences, 17 (6), 759-775.
16. George, T., 1986. Aerial verification of polygonal ressource maps: a low-cost approach to accuracy assessment. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing, 52 (6), 839-848.
17. Guigues, L., Cocquerez, J.P., and Le Men, H., 2006. Scale-sets image analysis. International Journal of Computer Vision, 68 (3), 289-317.
18. Hammond, T. and Verbyla, D.L., 1996. Optimistic bias in classification accuracy assessment. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 7 (6), 1261-1266.
19. Hay, G.J. and Castilla, G., 2008. Geographic object based image analysis: a new name for a new discipline. In: T. Blaschke, S. Lang, and G. Hay, (eds.), Object-based image analysis. Berlin: Springer, 91-111.
20. Kayitakire, F., Hamel, C., and Defourny, P., 2006. Retrieving forest structure variables based on image texture analysis and IKONOS-2 imagery. Remote Sensing of Environment, 102 (3-4), 390-401.
21. Lang, S., 2008. Object-based image analysis for remote sensing applications: modeling reality - dealing with complexity. In: T. Blaschke, S. Lang, and G. Hay, (eds.), Object-based image analysis. Berlin: Springer, 3-28.
22. Neubert, M., Herold, H., and Meine, G., 2008. Assessing image segmentation quality concepts, methods and application. In: T. Blaschke, S. Lang and G. Hay (eds.), Object-based image analysis. Berlin: Springer, 769-784.
23. Plourde, L. and Congalton, R., 2003. Sampling method and sample placement: how do they affect the accuracy of remotely sensed maps?. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing, 69, 289-297.
24. Powell, R.L., et al., 2004. Sources of error in accuracy assessment of thematic land-cover maps in the Brazilian Amazon. Remote sensing of Environment, 90, 221-234.
25. Radoux, J. and Defourny, P., 2007. A quantitative assessment of boundaries in automated forest stand delineation using very high resolution imagery. Remote Sensing of Environment, 110, 468-475.
26. Scarpa, G., et al., 2009. Hierarchical multiple Markov chain model for unsupervised texture segmentation. IEEE Transaction on Image Processing, 18 (8), 1830-1843.
27. Smith, J.H., et al., 2003. Effects of landscape characteristics on land-cover class accuracy. Remote Sensing of Environment, 84, 342-349.
28. Stehman, S.V., 1997. Selecting and interpreting measures of thematic classification accuracy. Remote Sensing of Environment, 62, 77-89.
29. Stehman, S.V. and Czaplewski, R.L., 1998. Design and analysis for thematic map accuracy assessment: fundamental principles. Remote Sensing of Environment, 64, 331-344.
30. Stow, D., et al., 2008. Monitoring shrubland habitat changes through object-based change identification with airborne multispectral imagery. Remote Sensing of Environment, 112 (3), 1051-1061.
31. Strahler, A.H., et al., 2006. Global land cover validation: recommendations for evaluation and accuracy assessment of global land cover maps. GOFC-GOLD Report, 25, 1-52.
32. Tatem, A.S., Noor, A.M., and Hay, S.I., 2005. Assessing the accuracy of satellite derived global and national urban maps in Kenya. Remote Sensing of Environment, 96, 87-97.
33. Thomlinson, J.R., Bolstad, P.V., and Cohen, W.B., 1999. Coordinating methodologies for scaling landcover classifications from site-specific to global: steps toward validating global map products. Remote Sensing of Environment, 70 (1), 16-28.
34. Tiede, D., et al., 2008. Class modelling of biotope complexes - success and remaining challenges. In: GEOBIA 2008 - pixels, object, intelligence. ISPRS XXXVIII-4C1. Available from: http://www.ucalgary.ca/geobia/Publishing (accessed January 2010).
35. Warren, S.D., et al., 1990. An automated, objective procedure for selecting representative field sample sites. Photogrammetric engineering and remote sensing, 56 (3), 333-336.
36. Wulder, M.A., et al., 2006. Use of vector polygons for the accuracy assessment of pixel-based land cover maps. Canadian journal of remote sensing, 32 (3), 268-279.