Cited by 159Satellite Image Processing and PhotogrammetryAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval TechniquesAdvanced Image Fusion Techniques

Exploring the potential of conditional adversarial networks for optical and SAR image matching

Merkle, Nina, Auer, Stefan, Muller, Rupert, Reinartz, Peter·2018·IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing

Abstract

Tasks such as the monitoring of natural disasters or the detection of change highly benefit from complementary information about an area or a specific object of interest. The required information is provided by fusing high accurate coregistered and georeferenced datasets. Aligned high-resolution optical and synthetic aperture radar (SAR) data additionally enable an absolute geolocation accuracy improvement of the optical images by extracting accurate and reliable ground control points (GCPs) from the SAR images. In this paper, we investigate the applicability of a deep learning based matching concept for the generation of precise and accurate GCPs from SAR satellite images by matching optical and SAR images. To this end, conditional generative adversarial networks (cGANs) are trained to generate SAR-like image patches from optical images. For training and testing, optical and SAR image patches are extracted from TerraSAR-X and PRISM image pairs covering greater urban areas spread over Europe. The artificially generated patches are then used to improve the conditions for three known matching approaches based on normalized cross-correlation (NCC), scale-invariant feature transform (SIFT), and binary robust invariant scalable key (BRISK), which are normally not usable for the matching of optical and SAR images. The results validate that a NCC-, SIFT-, and BRISK-based matching greatly benefit, in terms of matching accuracy and precision, from the use of the artificial templates. The comparison with two state-of-the-art optical and SAR matching approaches shows the potential of the proposed method but also revealed some challenges and the necessity for further developments.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/jstars.2018.2803212

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 37 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Merkle, N., Auer, S., Muller, R., & Reinartz, P.
Affiliations
Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt e. V. (DLR) (DE)
Venue
IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing
Published
2018-06
Volume
11
Issue
6
Pages
1811-1820
ISSN
  • 1939-1404 (ISSN-L)
  • 2151-1535
OpenAlex
W2786355301
Cited by
159
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 35 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 5
FWCI
14.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing (publishedVersion)
  • elib (German Aerospace Center) (acceptedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Ocean Engineering › Satellite Image Processing and Photogrammetry
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Media Technology › Advanced Image Fusion Techniques
Keywords
conditional generative adversarial networks, synthetic aperture radar, ground control points, TerraSAR-X, PRISM, normalized cross-correlation, SIFT, BRISK, image registration, georeferencing, change detection

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