Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 459

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The effects of image misregistration on the accuracy of remotely sensed change detection

Xiaolong Dai, Khorram, S.·1998·IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing

Abstract

Image misregistration has become one of the significant bottlenecks for improving the accuracy of multisource data analysis, such as data fusion and change detection. In this paper, the effects of misregistration on the accuracy of remotely sensed change detection were systematically investigated and quantitatively evaluated. This simulation research focused on two interconnected components. In the first component, the statistical properties of the multispectral difference images were evaluated using semivariograms when multitemporal images were progressively misregistered against themselves and each other to investigate the band, temporal, and spatial frequency sensitivities of change detection to image misregistration. In the second component, the ellipsoidal change detection technique, based on the Mahalanobis distance of multispectral difference images, was proposed and used to progressively detect the land cover transitions at each misregistration stage for each pair of multitemporal images. The impact of misregistration on change detection was then evaluated in terms of the accuracy of change detection using the output from the ellipsoidal change detector. The experimental results using Landsat Thematic Mapper (TM) imagery are presented. It is interesting to notice that, among the seven TM bands, band 4 (near-infrared channel) is the most sensitive to misregistration when change detection is concerned. The results from false change analysis indicate a substantial degradation in the accuracy of remotely sensed change detection due to misregistration. It is shown that a registration accuracy of less than one-fifth of a pixel is required to achieve a change detection error of less than 10%.

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 · 10.1109/36.718860

Cites

8 of 8 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 8 references

Cited by

See all 459

Metadata

Authors
Dai, X., & Khorram, S.
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing
Published
1998
Volume
36
Issue
5
Pages
1566-1577
ISSN
0196-2892 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2161001197
Cited by
459
References
8
FWCI
23.02
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: The effects of image misregistration on the accuracy of remotely sensed change detection. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/36.718860
The paper
Dai, X., & Khorram, S. (1998). The effects of image misregistration on the accuracy of remotely sensed change detection. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing. https://doi.org/10.1109/36.718860

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.