The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Texture and Scale in Object-Based Analysis of Subdecimeter Resolution Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) Imagery
Abstract
Imagery acquired with unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) has great potential for incorporation into natural resource monitoring protocols due to their ability to be deployed quickly and repeatedly and to fly at low altitudes. While the imagery may have high spatial resolution, the spectral resolution is low when lightweight off-the-shelf digital cameras are used, and the inclusion of texture measures can potentially increase the classification accuracy. Texture measures have been used widely in pixel-based image analysis, but their use in an object-based environment has not been well documented. Our objectives were to determine the most suitable texture measures and the optimal image analysis scale for differentiating rangeland vegetation using UAV imagery segmented at multiple scales. A decision tree was used to determine the optimal texture features for each segmentation scale. Results indicated the following: (1) The error rate of the decision tree was lower; (2) prediction success was higher; (3) class separability was greater; and (4) overall accuracy was higher (high 90% range) at coarser segmentation scales. The inclusion of texture measures increased classification accuracies at nearly all segmentation scales, and entropy was the texture measure with the highest score in most decision trees. The results demonstrate that UAVs are viable platforms for rangeland monitoring and that the drawbacks of low-cost off-the-shelf digital cameras can be overcome by including texture measures and using object-based image analysis which is highly suitable for very high resolution imagery.
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
Rangeland Systems: Processes, Management and Challenges
(2017) · Springer Series on Environmental Management · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-46709-2 · Cited by 197
Metadata
- Authors
- Laliberte, A. S., & Rango, A.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing
- Published
- 2009-03
- Volume
- 47
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 761-770
- ISSN
- 0196-2892 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-0644
- OpenAlex
- W2097989534
- Cited by
- 323
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 29.52
- 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
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.