Cited by 402Remote-Sensing Image ClassificationSatellite Image Processing and PhotogrammetryAtmospheric aerosols and clouds

A cloud detection algorithm for satellite imagery based on deep learning

Open access
Jeppesen, Jacob Høxbroe, Jacobsen, Rune Hylsberg, Inceoglu, Fadil, Toftegaard, Thomas Skjødeberg·2019·Remote Sensing of Environment

Abstract

Reliable detection of clouds is a critical pre-processing step in optical satellite based remote sensing. Currently, most methods are based on classifying invidual pixels from their spectral signatures, therefore they do not incorporate the spatial patterns. This often leads to misclassifications of highly reflective surfaces, such as human made structures or snow/ice. Multi-temporal methods can be used to alleviate this problem, but these methods introduce new problems, such as the need of a cloud-free image of the scene. In this paper, we introduce the Remote Sensing Network (RS-Net), a deep learning model for detection of clouds in optical satellite imagery, based on the U-net architecture. The model is trained and evaluated using the Landsat 8 Biome and SPARCS datasets, and it shows state-of-the-art performance, especially over biomes with hardly distinguishable scenery, such as clouds over snowy and icy regions. In particular, the performance of the model that uses only the RGB bands is significantly improved, showing promising results for cloud detection with smaller satellites with limited multi-spectral capabilities. Furthermore, we show how training the RS-Net models on data from an existing cloud masking method, which are treated as noisy data, leads to increased performance compared to the original method. This is validated by using the Fmask algorithm to annotate the Landsat 8 datasets, and then use these annotations as training data for regularized RS-Net models, which then show improved performance compared to the Fmask algorithm. Finally, the classification time of a full Landsat 8 product is 18.0 ± 2.4 s for the largest RS-Net model, thereby making it suitable for production environments.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.rse.2019.03.039

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Suresh et al. proposed a new method, Modified Differential Evolution (MDE), for contrast and brightness enhancement.

    “In [140] Suresh et al. proposed a new method-Modified Differential Evolution (MDE) algorithm for contrast and brightness enhancement.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jeppesen, J. H., Jacobsen, R. H., Inceoglu, F., & Toftegaard, T. S.
Affiliations
Aarhus University (DK)
Corresponding author
Jeppesen, Jacob Høxbroe
Venue
Remote Sensing of Environment
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-08
Volume
229
Pages
247-259
ISSN
0034-4257 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2946072066
Cited by
402
References
8
Citations by year
2026: 27 · 2025: 42 · 2024: 91 · 2023: 67 · 2022: 60 · 2021: 63 · 2020: 45 · 2019: 7
FWCI
29.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Remote Sensing of Environment (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Innovationsfonden
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Media Technology › Remote-Sensing Image Classification
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Ocean Engineering › Satellite Image Processing and Photogrammetry
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Atmospheric aerosols and clouds
Keywords
cloud detection, optical satellite imagery, U-Net, Landsat 8, noisy training data

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