The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Hyperspectral Anomaly Detection With Robust Graph Autoencoders
Abstract
Anomaly detection of hyperspectral data has been gaining particular attention for its ability in detecting targets in an unsupervised manner. Autoencoder (AE), together with its variants can not only extract intrinsic features automatically but also detect anomalies that differ dramatically from others. Many AE-driven algorithms are, thus, proposed for anomaly detection in hyperspectral imagery (HSI), but they suffer from two problems: 1) when there exist anomalies in the training set, AE can generalize so well that it can also learn the abnormal patterns well, thereby reducing the ability to distinguish anomalies from the background and 2) geometric structure among samples are lost in latent space of AE, which is vital in hyperspectral anomaly detection. To tackle these problems, we propose a robust anomaly detector based on the AE framework, named robust graph AE (RGAE) detector, in this article. To be specific, we propose a robust AE framework with$\ell _{2,1}$-norm that is robust to noise and anomalies during training. Meanwhile, we embed a superpixel segmentation-based graph regularization term (SuperGraph) into AE. This strategy can preserve the geometric structure and the local spatial consistency of HSI simultaneously and also effectively reduce the searching space and execution time for each pixel. Extensive experiments are conducted on five datasets, and the results demonstrate that our method has a better detection performance, after comparing with other state-of-t…
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
In the citing paper
“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 [30]
In the citing paper
“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 [30]
Citations
Cites
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
Graph and Total Variation Regularized Low-Rank Representation for Hyperspectral Anomaly Detection
Cheng, T., & Wang, B. (2020) · IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing · doi:10.1109/tgrs.2019.2936609 · Cited by 266
Research works printed but not linked: 47
- 10.1109/MGRS.2013.2244672 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1109/MSP.2013.2278992 · DOI
- 10.1109/MGRS.2021.3075491 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.neucom.2017.11.052 · DOI
- 10.1109/TGRS.2020.3048257 · DOI
- 10.1109/TGRS.2020.2982064 · DOI
- 10.1109/TGRS.2019.2892899 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.jag.2017.05.004 · DOI
- 10.3390/rs9111110 · DOI
- 10.3390/rs10030417 · DOI
- 10.1109/MAES.2010.5546306 · DOI
- 10.1109/TGRS.2014.2303895 · DOI
- 10.1109/TGRS.2018.2872590 · DOI
- 10.1109/JSTARS.2019.2940278 · DOI
- 10.1109/29.60107 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1109/JSTARS.2013.2238609 · DOI
- 10.1109/TGRS.2004.841487 · DOI
- 10.1109/TGRS.2016.2585495 · DOI
- 10.1109/WHISPERS.2015.8075391 · DOI
- 10.1109/TGRS.2015.2493201 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1109/TGRS.2018.2818159 · DOI
- 10.1109/IGARSS.2016.7729476 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.inffus.2018.09.004 · DOI
- 10.1109/TIP.2020.2999855 · DOI
- 10.1109/TGRS.2020.3046321 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.ins.2020.03.062 · DOI
- 10.1109/IGARSS.2019.8898697 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.infrared.2018.06.001 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.infrared.2018.12.011 · DOI
- 10.1109/TGRS.2019.2944419 · DOI
- 10.1109/TCYB.2015.2497711 · DOI
- 10.1109/ICCV.2019.00179 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1145/1143844.1143880 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.ins.2020.03.033 · DOI
- 10.1109/ICASSP39728.2021.9414767 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.neunet.2019.08.012 · DOI
- 10.1109/TPAMI.2016.2562626 · DOI
- 10.1109/TPAMI.2015.2400461 · DOI
- 10.1109/TIP.2016.2605010 · DOI
- 10.1109/CVPR.2017.746 · DOI
- 10.1109/TGRS.2016.2616161 · DOI
- 10.1145/3097983.3098052 · DOI
- 10.1109/ICDM.2016.0031 · DOI
- 10.1109/TPAMI.2012.120 · DOI
- 10.1109/TGRS.2019.2961703 · DOI
- 10.1109/TGRS.2015.2479299 · DOI
- 10.1109/TGRS.2019.2936308 · DOI
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
Metadata
- Authors
- Fan, G., Ma, Y., Mei, X., Fan, F., Huang, J., & Ma, J.
- Affiliations
- Wuhan University (CN)
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing
- Published
- 2022
- Volume
- 60
- Pages
- 1-14
- ISSN
- 0196-2892 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-0644
- OpenAlex
- W3186256209
- Cited by
- 212
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 28 · 2025: 68 · 2024: 58 · 2023: 40 · 2022: 18
- FWCI
- 13.01
- 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 (61903279, 62075169, 62003247, 62061160370)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Remote-Sensing Image Classification
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Infrared Target Detection Methodologies
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Anomaly Detection Techniques and Applications
- Keywords
- hyperspectral anomaly detection, graph autoencoder, l2,1-norm regularization, superpixel segmentation, graph regularization, spatial structure preservation, unsupervised anomaly detection, hyperspectral imagery
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