The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Spatial analysis of remote sensing image classification accuracy
Open accessAbstract
The error matrix is the most common way of expressing the accuracy of remote sensing image classifications, such as land cover. However, it and the measures that can be calculated from it have been criticised for not providing any indication of the spatial distribution of errors. Other research has identified the need for methods to analyse the spatial non-stationarity of error and to visualise the spatial variation in classification uncertainty. This research uses geographically weighted approaches to model the spatial variations in the accuracy of both (crisp) Boolean and (soft) fuzzy land cover classes. Remotely sensed data were classified using a maximum likelihood classifier and a fuzzy classifier to predict Boolean and fuzzy land cover classes respectively. Field data were collected at sub-pixel locations and used to generate soft and crisp validation data. A Geographically Weighted Regression was used to analyse spatial variations in the relationships between observations of Boolean land cover in the field and land cover classified from remote sensing imagery. A geographically weighted difference measure was used to analyse spatial variations in fuzzy land cover accuracy. Maps of the spatial distribution of accuracy were created for fuzzy and Boolean classes. This research demonstrates that data collected as part of a standard remote sensing validation exercise can be used to estimate mapped, spatial distributions of accuracy that would augment standard accuracy measures reported in the error matrix. It suggests that geographically weighted approaches, and the spatially explicit representations of accuracy they support, offer the opportunity to report land cover accuracy in a more informative way.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Li, M., Zang, S., Zhang, B., Li, S., & Wu, C. (2014) · European Journal of Remote Sensing · doi:10.5721/eujrs20144723 · Cited by 538
Uncertainty Assessment of Hyperspectral Image Classification: Deep Learning vs. Random Forest
Shadman Roodposhti, M., Aryal, J., Lucieer, A., & Bryan, B. A. (2019) · Entropy · doi:10.3390/e21010078 · Cited by 65
Metadata
- Authors
- Comber, A., Fisher, P., Brunsdon, C., & Khmag, A.
- Venue
- Remote Sensing of Environment
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2012-12
- Volume
- 127
- Pages
- 237-246
- ISSN
- 0034-4257 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1989314352
- Cited by
- 237
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 24.04
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Spatial analysis of remote sensing image classification accuracy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.rse.2012.09.005
- The paper
- Comber, A., Fisher, P., Brunsdon, C., & Khmag, A. (2012). Spatial analysis of remote sensing image classification accuracy. Remote Sensing of Environment. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2012.09.005
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.