The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Segment Optimization and Data-Driven Thresholding for Knowledge-Based Landslide Detection by Object-Based Image Analysis
Abstract
To detect landslides by object-based image analysis using criteria based on shape, color, texture, and, in particular, contextual information and process knowledge, candidate segments must be delineated properly. This has proved challenging in the past, since segments are mainly created using spectral and size criteria that are not consistent for landslides. This paper presents an approach to select objectively parameters for a region growing segmentation technique to outline landslides as individual segments and also addresses the scale dependence of landslides and false positives occurring in a natural landscape. Multiple scale parameters were determined using a plateau objective function derived from the spatial autocorrelation and intrasegment variance analysis, allowing for differently sized features to be identified. While a high-resolution Resourcesat-1 Linear Imaging and Self Scanning Sensor IV (5.8 m) multispectral image was used to create segments for landslide recognition, terrain curvature derived from a digital terrain model based on Cartosat-1 (2.5 m) data was used to create segments for subsequent landslide classification. Here, optimal segments were used in a knowledge-based classification approach with the thresholds of diagnostic parameters derived from If-means cluster analysis, to detect landslides of five different types, with an overall recognition accuracy of 76.9%. The approach, when tested in a geomorphologically dissimilar area, recognized landslides with an overall accuracy of 77.7%, without modification to the methodology. The multiscale classification-based segment optimization procedure was also able to reduce the error of commission significantly in comparison to a single-optimal-scale approach.
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
Satellite Image Analysis for Disaster and Crisis-Management Support
Voigt, S., Kemper, T., Riedlinger, T., Kiefl, R., Scholte, K., & Mehl, H. (2007) · IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing · doi:10.1109/tgrs.2007.895830 · Cited by 387
Cited by
Remote Sensing Image Scene Classification: Benchmark and State of the Art
Cheng, G., Han, J., & Lu, X. (2017) · Proceedings of the IEEE · doi:10.1109/jproc.2017.2675998 · Cited by 2,926
Cheng, G., Han, J., Zhou, P., & Guo, L. (2014) · ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing · doi:10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2014.10.002 · Cited by 1,007
Metadata
- Authors
- Martha, T. R., Kerle, N., van Westen, C. J., Jetten, V., & Kumar, K. V.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing
- Published
- 2011-12
- Volume
- 49
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 4928-4943
- ISSN
- 0196-2892 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-0644
- OpenAlex
- W2122282653
- Cited by
- 318
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 43.42
- 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.