The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Automatic analysis of the difference image for unsupervised change detection
Abstract
One of the main problems related to unsupervised change detection methods based on the "difference image" lies in the lack of efficient automatic techniques for discriminating between changed and unchanged pixels in the difference image. Such discrimination is usually performed by using empirical strategies or manual trial-and-error procedures, which affect both the accuracy and the reliability of the change-detection process. To overcome such drawbacks, in this paper, the authors propose two automatic techniques (based on the Bayes theory) for the analysis of the difference image. One allows an automatic selection of the decision threshold that minimizes the overall change detection error probability under the assumption that pixels in the difference image are independent of one another. The other analyzes the difference image by considering the spatial-contextual information included in the neighborhood of each pixel. In particular, an approach based on Markov Random Fields (MRFs) that exploits interpixel class dependency contexts is presented. Both proposed techniques require the knowledge of the statistical distributions of the changed and unchanged pixels in the difference image. To perform an unsupervised estimation of the statistical terms that characterize these distributions, they propose an iterative method based on the Expectation-Maximization (EM) algorithm. Experimental results confirm the effectiveness of both proposed techniques.
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
Maximum Likelihood from Incomplete Data Via the EM Algorithm
Dempster, A. P., Laird, N. M., & Rubin, D. B. (1977) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology · doi:10.1111/j.2517-6161.1977.tb01600.x · Cited by 50,444
Cited by
Ghamisi, P., Yokoya, N., Li, J., Liao, W., Liu, S., Plaza, J., Rasti, B., & Plaza, A. (2017) · IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Magazine · doi:10.1109/mgrs.2017.2762087 · Cited by 909
End-to-End Change Detection for High Resolution Satellite Images Using Improved UNet++
Peng, D., Zhang, Y., & Guan, H. (2019) · Remote Sensing · doi:10.3390/rs11111382 · Cited by 804
Nielsen, A. A. (2007) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2006.888195 · Cited by 746
Earthquake Damage Assessment of Buildings Using VHR Optical and SAR Imagery
Brunner, D., Lemoine, G., & Bruzzone, L. (2010) · IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing · doi:10.1109/tgrs.2009.2038274 · Cited by 586
Self-citationUnsupervised Deep Change Vector Analysis for Multiple-Change Detection in VHR Images
Saha, S., Bovolo, F., & Bruzzone, L. (2019) · IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing · doi:10.1109/tgrs.2018.2886643 · Cited by 523
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Bruzzone, L., & Prieto, D. F.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing
- Published
- 2000-05
- Volume
- 38
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 1171-1182
- ISSN
- 0196-2892 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2160544350
- Cited by
- 1,339
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 41.58
- 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: Automatic analysis of the difference image for unsupervised change detection. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/36.843009
- The paper
- Bruzzone, L., & Prieto, D. F. (2000). Automatic analysis of the difference image for unsupervised change detection. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing. https://doi.org/10.1109/36.843009
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.