The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Decision tree classification of land cover from remotely sensed data
Open accessAbstract
Decision tree classification algorithms have significant potential for land cover mapping problems and have not been tested in detail by the remote sensing community relative to more conventional pattern recognition techniques such as maximum likelihood classification. In this paper, we present several types of decision tree classification algorithms arid evaluate them on three different remote sensing data sets. The decision tree classification algorithms tested include an univariate decision tree, a multivariate decision tree, and a hybrid decision tree capable of including several different types of classification algorithms within a single decision tree structure. Classification accuracies produced by each of these decision tree algorithms are compared with both maximum likelihood and linear discriminant function classifiers. Results from this analysis show that the decision tree algorithms consistently outperform the maximum likelihood and linear discriminant function classifiers in regard to classf — cation accuracy. In particular, the hybrid tree consistently produced the highest classification accuracies for the data sets tested. More generally, the results from this work show that decision trees have several advantages for remote sensing applications by virtue of their relatively simple, explicit, and intuitive classification structure. Further, decision tree algorithms are strictly nonparametric and, therefore, make no assumptions regarding the distribution of input data, and are flexible and robust with respect to nonlinear and noisy relations among input features and class labels.
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
Cites
Quinlan, J. R. (1986) · Machine Learning · doi:10.1007/bf00116251 · Cited by 21,439
Cited by
Rodriguez-Galiano, V., Sanchez-Castillo, M., Chica-Olmo, M., & Chica-Rivas, M. (2015) · Ore Geology Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.oregeorev.2015.01.001 · Cited by 1,576
Data Mining for Internet of Things: A Survey
Tsai, C.-W., Lai, C.-F., Chiang, M.-C., & Yang, L. T. (2014) · IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials · doi:10.1109/surv.2013.103013.00206 · Cited by 620
Tutorial on practical tips of the most influential data preprocessing algorithms in data mining
García, S., Luengo, J., & Herrera, F. (2016) · Knowledge-Based Systems · doi:10.1016/j.knosys.2015.12.006 · Cited by 310
Humid tropical forest disturbance alerts using Landsat data
Hansen, M. C., Krylov, A., Tyukavina, A., Potapov, P. V., Turubanova, S., Zutta, B., Ifo, S., Margono, B., Stolle, F., & Moore, R. (2016) · Environmental Research Letters · doi:10.1088/1748-9326/11/3/034008 · Cited by 303
Spatiotemporal Data Mining: A Computational Perspective
Shekhar, S., Jiang, Z., Ali, R., Eftelioglu, E., Tang, X., Gunturi, V., & Zhou, X. (2015) · ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information · doi:10.3390/ijgi4042306 · Cited by 206
Security, Privacy, and Usability in Continuous Authentication: A Survey
Baig, A. F., & Eskeland, S. (2021) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s21175967 · Cited by 98
Machine learning for microalgae detection and utilization
Ning, H., Li, R., & Zhou, T. (2022) · Frontiers in Marine Science · doi:10.3389/fmars.2022.947394 · Cited by 83
Mapping Selective Logging in Mixed Deciduous Forest
Lippitt, C. D., Rogan, J., Li, Z., Eastman, J. R., & Jones, T. G. (2008) · Photogrammetric Engineering & Remote Sensing · doi:10.14358/pers.74.10.1201 · Cited by 56
Asset health management using predictive and prescriptive analytics for the electric power grid
Goyal, A., Aprilia, E., Janssen, G., Kim, Y., Kumar, T., Mueller, R., Phan, D., Raman, A., Schuddebeurs, J., Xiong, J., et al. (2016) · IBM Journal of Research and Development · doi:10.1147/jrd.2015.2475935 · Cited by 43
Zhang, C., Liu, Y., & Tie, N. (2023) · Forests · doi:10.3390/f14020254 · Cited by 42
Evaluating machine learning algorithms estimating tremor severity ratings on the Bain–Findley scale
Yohanandan, S. A. C., Jones, M., Peppard, R., Tan, J. L., McDermott, H. J., & Perera, T. (2016) · Measurement Science and Technology · doi:10.1088/0957-0233/27/12/125702 · Cited by 8
Metadata
- Authors
- Friedl, M. A., & Brodley, C. E.
- Venue
- Remote Sensing of Environment
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1997-09
- Volume
- 61
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 399-409
- ISSN
- 0034-4257 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2035549557
- Cited by
- 1,542
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 32.40
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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
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.