Discriminative Reconstruction Constrained Generative Adversarial Network for Hyperspectral Anomaly Detection
Abstract
The rich and distinguishable spectral information in hyperspectral images (HSIs) makes it possible to capture anomalous samples [i.e., anomaly detection (AD)] that deviate from background samples. However, hyperspectral anomaly detection (HAD) faces various challenges due to high dimensionality, redundant information, and unlabeled and limited samples. To address these problems, this article proposes an unsupervised discriminative reconstruction constrained generative adversarial network for HAD (HADGAN). Our solution is mainly based on the assumption that the number of normal samples is much larger than the number of abnormal ones. The key contribution of this article is to learn a discriminative background reconstruction with anomaly targets being suppressed, which produces the initial detection image (i.e., the residual image between the original image and reconstructed image) with anomaly targets being highlighted and background samples being suppressed. To accomplish this goal, first, by using an autoencoder (AE) network and an adversarial latent discriminator, the latent feature layer learns normal background distribution and AE learns a background reconstruction as much as possible. Second, consistency enhanced representation and shrink constraints are added to the latent feature layer to ensure that anomaly samples are projected to similar positions as normal samples in the latent feature layer. Third, using an adversarial image feature corrector in the input space can guarantee the reliability of the generated samples. Finally, an energy-based spatial and distance-based spectral joint anomaly detector is applied in the residual map to generate the final detection map. Experiments conducted on several data sets over different scenes demonstrate its state-of-the-art performance.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
AE-based anomaly detectors for hyperspectral images have a common drawback: the accuracy of background reconstruction is susceptible to anomalies and noises.
“the reconstruction accuracy is susceptible to the anomalies and noises.”
From Background Reconstruction via 3D-Transformer Network for Hyperspectral Anomaly Detection (2023) · cites this paper as [28]
Spatial properties between pixels are absent in most AE-based anomaly detectors, which is vital for reconstructing an accurate background.
“Unfortunately, the spatial properties between pixels are absent in most of the AE-based anomaly detectors, which is vital for reconstructing an accurate background.”
From Background Reconstruction via 3D-Transformer Network for Hyperspectral Anomaly Detection (2023) · cites this paper as [28]
Cites
Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization
Kingma, D. P., & Ba, J. (2014) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1412.6980 · Cited by 98,946 · see citing works
Deep learning-based classification of hyperspectral data
Chen, Y., Lin, Z., Zhao, X., Wang, G., & Gu, Y. (2014) · IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing · doi:10.1109/jstars.2014.2329330 · Cited by 2,679 · see citing works
Collaborative representation for hyperspectral anomaly detection
Li, W., & Du, Q. (2015) · IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing · doi:10.1109/tgrs.2014.2343955 · Cited by 758 · see citing works
Self-citationSkip-GANomaly: Skip Connected and Adversarially Trained Encoder-Decoder Anomaly Detection
Akcay, S., Atapour-Abarghouei, A., & Breckon, T. P. (2019) · 2019 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN) · doi:10.1109/ijcnn.2019.8851808 · Cited by 103 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Background Reconstruction via 3D-Transformer Network for Hyperspectral Anomaly Detection
Wu, Z., & Wang, B. (2023) · Remote Sensing · doi:10.3390/rs15184592 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
- Authors
- Jiang, T., Li, Y., Xie, W., & Du, Q.
- Affiliations
- Xidian University (CN)
- Mississippi State University (US)
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing
- Published
- 2020-07
- Volume
- 58
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 4666-4679
- ISSN
- 0196-2892 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-0644
- OpenAlex
- W3003955104
- Cited by
- 209
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 24 · 2025: 30 · 2024: 36 · 2023: 40 · 2022: 40 · 2021: 31 · 2020: 8
- FWCI
- 15.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Natural Science Foundation of China (61801359, 61571345, 91538101, 61501346, 61502367, 61701360)
- Young Talent Fund of the University Association for Science and Technology in Shaanxi of China (20190103)
- Special Financial Grant from the China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (2019T120878)
- Higher Education Discipline Innovation Project (B08038)
- Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (JB180104)
- Natural Science Basic Research Plan in Shaanxi Province of China (2019JQ153, 2016JQ6023, 2016JQ6018)
- General Financial Grant from the China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (2017M620440)
- Yangtse Rive Scholar Bonus Schemes (CJT160102)
- Ten Thousand Talent Program
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Media Technology › Remote-Sensing Image Classification
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Anomaly Detection Techniques and Applications
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Aerospace Engineering › Infrared Target Detection Methodologies
- Keywords
- hyperspectral anomaly detection, generative adversarial networks, background reconstruction, autoencoder, residual maps, energy detection, unsupervised anomaly 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