The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Harshness in image classification accuracy assessment
Open accessAbstract
Thematic mapping via a classification analysis is one of the most common applications of remote sensing. The accuracy of image classifications is, however, often viewed negatively. Here, it is suggested that the approach to the evaluation of image classification accuracy typically adopted in remote sensing may often be unfair, commonly being rather harsh and misleading. It is stressed that the widely used target accuracy of 85% can be inappropriate and that the approach to accuracy assessment adopted commonly in remote sensing is pessimistically biased. Moreover, the maps produced by other communities, which are often used unquestioningly, may have a low accuracy if evaluated from the standard perspective adopted in remote sensing. A greater awareness of the problems encountered in accuracy assessment may help ensure that perceptions of classification accuracy are realistic and reduce unfair criticism of thematic maps derived from remote sensing.
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
Revisiting Kappa to account for change in the accuracy assessment of land-use change models
van Vliet, J., Bregt, A. K., & Hagen-Zanker, A. (2011) · Ecological Modelling · doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2011.01.017 · Cited by 317
Sample size determination for image classification accuracy assessment and comparison
Foody, G. M. (2009) · International Journal of Remote Sensing · doi:10.1080/01431160903130937 · Cited by 248
Metadata
- Authors
- Foody, G. M.
- Venue
- International Journal of Remote Sensing
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2008-05-19
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 3137-3158
- ISSN
- 0143-1161 (ISSN-L)
- 1366-5901
- OpenAlex
- W2069099149
- Cited by
- 357
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 37.91
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Harshness in image classification accuracy assessment. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/01431160701442120
- The paper
- Foody, G. M. (2008). Harshness in image classification accuracy assessment. International Journal of Remote Sensing. https://doi.org/10.1080/01431160701442120
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.