Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 409

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 26 of the 26 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Practical guidelines for choosing GLCM textures to use in landscape classification tasks over a range of moderate spatial scales

Hall-Beyer, Mryka·2017·International Journal of Remote Sensing

Abstract

Texture measurements quantitatively describe relationships of DN values of neighbouring pixels. The output is a continuous measure of spatial information that may be used for further processing. Spatial relationships are not necessarily correlated with spectral data for a given class, and including a measure of them improves classification accuracy. This research develops a guideline for choosing among the Haralick (Grey Level Co-occurrence Matrix [GLCM]) set of texture measures. These guidelines are derived using a variety of land covers and spatial scales (window sizes).Principal component analysis (PCA) of eight GLCM measures was performed for three Landsat TM and ETM+ images: a mid-latitude agricultural and natural vegetation scene, a glacier–rock–sea ice scene, and a desert scene with dunes and structurally complex rocks. PCA was performed separately for neighbourhoods consisting of squares with 25, 13, and 5 pixels on a side to demonstrate robustness to different spatial scales. PCA loadings show that contrast (Con), dissimilarity, entropy (Ent), and GLCM variance are most commonly associated with visual edges of land-cover patches; homogeneity, GLCM mean, GLCM correlation (GLCM Cor), and angular second moment are associated with patch interiors. Edge-highlighting textures account for most dataset variance but fail to differentiate among classes. Eigenchannels highlighting patch interior characteristics rely on GLCM mean and to some extent GLCM Cor. These two textures do contribute to distinguishing individual class signatures for classification purposes. Ent does not appear consistently in edge or interior groupings. Ent is interpreted as important to the textures of particular classes, but which classes is not generalized from one scene to another. Con is effective for outlining patch edges and may serve for object formation in geographic object-based image analysis (GEOBIA).For classification purposes, the proposed guideline is a choose Mean and, where a class patch is likely to contain edge-like features within it, Con. Cor is an alternative for Mean in these situations, Dis may similarly be used in place of Con. For more detailed texture study, add Ent. This guideline does not constitute a complete texture analysis but may allow confident use of GLCM texture to enhance the efficiency of Landsat-based classification.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/01431161.2016.1278314

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 26 references

Cited by

See all 409

Metadata

Authors
Hall-Beyer, M.
Venue
International Journal of Remote Sensing
Published
2017-01-31
Volume
38
Issue
5
Pages
1312-1338
ISSN
  • 0143-1161 (ISSN-L)
  • 1366-5901
OpenAlex
W2585014453
Cited by
409
References
26
FWCI
15.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Practical guidelines for choosing GLCM textures to use in landscape classification tasks over a range of moderate spatial scales. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/01431161.2016.1278314
The paper
Hall-Beyer, M. (2017). Practical guidelines for choosing GLCM textures to use in landscape classification tasks over a range of moderate spatial scales. International Journal of Remote Sensing. https://doi.org/10.1080/01431161.2016.1278314

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.