CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 1

The DOI matches its DataCite record.

Country-wide Retrieval of Forest Structure From Optical and SAR Satellite Imagery With Deep Ensembles

Becker, Alexander, Russo, Stefania, Puliti, Stefano, Lang, Nico, Schindler, Konrad, Wegner, Jan Dirk·2021·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2111.13154arXiv 2111.13154
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Monitoring and managing Earth's forests in an informed manner is an important requirement for addressing challenges like biodiversity loss and climate change. While traditional in situ or aerial campaigns for forest assessments provide accurate data for analysis at regional level, scaling them to entire countries and beyond with high temporal resolution is hardly possible. In this work, we propose a method based on deep ensembles that densely estimates forest structure variables at country-scale with 10-meter resolution, using freely available satellite imagery as input. Our method jointly transforms Sentinel-2 optical images and Sentinel-1 synthetic-aperture radar images into maps of five different forest structure variables: 95th height percentile, mean height, density, Gini coefficient, and fractional cover. We train and test our model on reference data from 41 airborne laser scanning missions across Norway and demonstrate that it is able to generalize to unseen test regions, achieving normalized mean absolute errors between 11% and 15%, depending on the variable. Our work is also the first to propose a variant of so-called Bayesian deep learning to densely predict multiple forest structure variables with well-calibrated uncertainty estimates from satellite imagery. The uncertainty information increases the trustworthiness of the model and its suitability for downstream tasks that require reliable confidence estimates as a basis for decision making. We present an extensive set of experiments to validate the accuracy of the predicted maps as well as the quality of the predicted uncertainties. To demonstrate scalability, we provide Norway-wide maps for the five forest structure variables.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2111.13154

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • The approach scales up previous regional deep learning methods to process the entire global landmass.

    “While retrieval of vegetation parameters with deep learning has been demonstrated regionally and up to country scale16–19, we scale it up and process the entire global landmass.”

    From A high-resolution canopy height model of the Earth (2023) · cites this paper as [17]

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

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 60

  1. A. Ashukha, A. Lyzhov, D. Molchanov, D. Vetrov, Pitfalls of in- domain uncertainty estimation and ensembling in deep learning, in: International Conference on Learning Representations, 2020.
  2. R. Astrup, J. Rahlf, K. Bjørkelo, M. Debella-Gilo, A.-K. Gjertsen, J. Breidenbach, Forest information at multiple scales: development, evaluation and application of the norwegian forest resources map SR16, Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research 34 (2019) 484-496.
  3. K. Bergen, S. Goetz, R. Dubayah, G. Henebry, C. Hunsaker, M. Imhoff, R. Nelson, G. Parker, V. Radeloff, Remote sensing of vegetation 3-d structure for biodiversity and habitat: Review and implications for lidar and radar spaceborne missions, Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences 114 (2009).
  4. C. Blundell, J. Cornebise, K. Kavukcuoglu, D. Wierstra, Weight uncertainty in neural network, in: Proceedings of the 32nd Inter- national Conference on Machine Learning, volume 37, 2015, pp. 1613-1622.
  5. J. Breidenbach, L. T. Waser, M. Debella-Gilo, J. Schumacher, J. Rahlf, M. Hauglin, S. Puliti, R. Astrup, National mapping and estima- tion of forest area by dominant tree species using sentinel-2 data, Canadian Journal of Forest Research 51 (2021) 365-379.
  6. D. Carrasco, J. Diaz, A. Broquetas Ibars, R. Arbiol, M. Castillo, V. Pala, Ascending-descending orbit combination SAR interfer- ometry assessment, in: Third ERS Symposium on Space at the Service of Our Environment: Florence, Italy: 14-21 March 1997, ESA Publications Division, 1997, pp. 1789-1794.
  7. R. Caye Daudt, B. Le Saux, A. Boulch, Fully convolutional siamese networks for change detection, in: 25th IEEE International Con- ference on Image Processing (ICIP), 2018, pp. 4063-4067.
  8. L.-C. Chen, G. Papandreou, I. Kokkinos, K. Murphy, A. L. Yuille, DeepLab: Semantic image segmentation with deep convolutional nets, atrous convolution, and fully connected CRFs, CoRR abs/1606.00915 (2016). · arXiv
  9. T. Chen, E. Fox, C. Guestrin, Stochastic gradient hamiltonian monte carlo, in: Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Machine Learning, volume 32, 2014, pp. 1683-1691.
  10. N. R. Council, Completing the Forecast: Characterizing and Com- municating Uncertainty for Better Decisions Using Weather and Climate Forecasts, The National Academies Press, Washington, DC, 2006.
  11. R. de Lutio, S. D'Aronco, J. D. Wegner, K. Schindler, Guided super-resolution as pixel-to-pixel transformation, in: IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), 2019, pp. 8828-8836.
  12. Y. Gal, Z. Ghahramani, Dropout as a bayesian approximation: Repre- senting model uncertainty in deep learning, in: Proceedings of The 33rd International Conference on Machine Learning, volume 48, 2016, pp. 1050-1059.
  13. V. S. F. Garnot, L. Landrieu, S. Giordano, N. Chehata, Time-space tradeoff in deep learning models for crop classification on satellite multi-spectral image time series, in: IGARSS 2019-2019 IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium, IEEE, 2019, pp. 6247-6250.
  14. J. Gast, S. Roth, Lightweight probabilistic deep networks, in: Pro- ceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2018, pp. 3369-3378.
  15. R. Girshick, J. Donahue, T. Darrell, J. Malik, Rich feature hierar- chies for accurate object detection and semantic segmentation, in: Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2014, pp. 580-587.
  16. I. Goodfellow, Y. Bengio, A. Courville, Deep Learning, MIT Press, 2016. http://www.deeplearningbook.org.
  17. C. Guo, G. Pleiss, Y. Sun, K. Q. Weinberger, On calibration of modern neural networks, in: Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Machine Learning, volume 70, 2017, pp. 1321-1330.
  18. F. K. Gustafsson, M. Danelljan, T. B. Schon, Evaluating scalable bayesian deep learning methods for robust computer vision, in: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops, 2020, pp. 1289-1298.
  19. K. He, X. Zhang, S. Ren, J. Sun, Deep residual learning for image recognition, in: Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2016, pp. 770-778.
  20. P. Helber, B. Bischke, A. Dengel, D. Borth, Eurosat: A novel dataset and deep learning benchmark for land use and land cover classification, IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing (2019).
  21. J. Hyyppä, O. Kelle, M. Lehikoinen, M. Inkinen, A segmentation- based method to retrieve stem volume estimates from 3-d tree height models produced by laser scanners, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 39 (2001) 969-975.
  22. S. Ioffe, C. Szegedy, Batch normalization: Accelerating deep network training by reducing internal covariate shift, in: Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Machine Learning, volume 37, PMLR, 2015, pp. 448-456.
  23. P. Kaiser, J. Wegner, A. Lucchi, M. Jaggi, T. Hofmann, K. Schindler, Learning Aerial Image Segmentation from Online Maps, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing PP (2017) 1-15.
  24. A. Kendall, Y. Gal, What uncertainties do we need in bayesian deep learning for computer vision?, in: Proceedings of the 31st Inter- national Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, 2017, p. 5580-5590.
  25. D. P. Kingma, J. Ba, Adam: A method for stochastic optimiza- tion, in: Proceedings of the International Conference on Learning Representations, 2015.
  26. A. Krizhevsky, I. Sutskever, G. E. Hinton, ImageNet classification with deep convolutional neural networks, in: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, volume 25, 2012.
  27. K. Kuwata, R. Shibasaki, Estimating crop yields with deep learning and remotely sensed data, in: 2015 IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium (IGARSS), 2015, pp. 858-861.
  28. B. Lakshminarayanan, A. Pritzel, C. Blundell, Simple and scal- able predictive uncertainty estimation using deep ensembles, in: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, volume 30, 2017.
  29. C. Lanaras, J. Bioucas-Dias, S. Galliani, E. Baltsavias, K. Schindler, Super-resolution of Sentinel-2 images: Learning a globally applica- ble deep neural network, ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing 146 (2018) 305-319.
  30. N. Lang, K. Schindler, J. D. Wegner, High carbon stock mapping at large scale with optical satellite imagery and spaceborne LIDAR, arXiv preprint arXiv:2107.07431 (2021). · arXiv
  31. G. V. Laurin, J. Balling, P. Corona, W. Mattioli, D. Papale, N. Puletti, M. Rizzo, J. Truckenbrodt, M. Urban, Above-ground biomass prediction by Sentinel-1 multitemporal data in central Italy with integration of ALOS2 and Sentinel-2 data, Journal of Applied Remote Sensing 12 (2018) 1 -18.
  32. J. Long, E. Shelhamer, T. Darrell, Fully convolutional networks for semantic segmentation, in: 2015 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2015, pp. 3431-3440.
  33. M. Main-Knorn, B. Pflug, J. Louis, V. Debaecker, U. Müller-Wilm, F. Gascon, Sen2Cor for Sentinel-2, in: L. Bruzzone, F. Bovolo, J. A. Benediktsson (Eds.), Image and Signal Processing for Remote Sensing XXIII, 2017.
  34. D. Marmanis, K. Schindler, J. Wegner, S. Galliani, M. Datcu, U. Stilla, Classification with an edge: improving semantic image segmenta- tion with boundary detection, ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing 135 (2018) 158-172.
  35. D. M. Martin, F. A. Johnson, Incorporating uncertainty and risk into decision making to reduce nitrogen inputs to impaired waters, Journal of Environmental Management 249 (2019) 109380.
  36. R. M. Neal, Bayesian Learning for Neural Networks, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1996.
  37. E. Næsset, Airborne laser scanning as a method in operational forest inventory: Status of accuracy assessments accomplished in scandinavia, Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research 22 (2007) 433-442.
  38. E. Næsset, T. Gobakken, J. Holmgren, H. Hyyppä, J. Hyyppä, M. Mal- tamo, M. Nilsson, H. Olsson, Åsa Persson, U. Söderman, Laser scanning of forest resources: the nordic experience, Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research 19 (2004) 482-499.
  39. Y. Ovadia, E. Fertig, J. Ren, Z. Nado, D. Sculley, S. Nowozin, J. Dil- lon, B. Lakshminarayanan, J. Snoek, Can you trust your model's uncertainty? evaluating predictive uncertainty under dataset shift, in: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, volume 32, 2019.
  40. A. Paszke, S. Gross, S. Chintala, G. Chanan, E. Yang, Z. DeVito, Z. Lin, A. Desmaison, L. Antiga, A. Lerer, Automatic differentia- tion in PyTorch, in: NeurIPS Automatic Differentiation Workshop, 2017.
  41. R. Ranganath, S. Gerrish, D. Blei, Black box variational inference, Journal of Machine Learning Research (2014) 814-822.
  42. C. E. Rasmussen, Gaussian Processes in Machine Learning, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2004, pp. 63-71.
  43. J. Redmon, S. Divvala, R. Girshick, A. Farhadi, You only look once: Unified, real-time object detection, in: 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2016, pp. 779-788.
  44. A. Rodríguez, J. Wegner, Counting the uncountable: deep semantic density estimation from Space, in: German Conference on Pattern Recognition, 2018, pp. 351-362.
  45. M. Rußwurm, M. Körner, Multi-temporal land cover classification with sequential recurrent encoders, ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information 7 (2018) 129.
  46. M. Rußwurm, M. Körner, Self-attention for raw optical satellite time series classification, ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing 169 (2020) 421-435.
  47. R. Rustowicz, R. Cheong, L. Wang, S. Ermon, M. Burke, D. Lobell, Semantic segmentation of crop type in Africa: A novel dataset and analysis of deep learning methods, in: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recogni- tion Workshops, 2019, pp. 75-82.
  48. K. Simonyan, A. Zisserman, Very deep convolutional networks for large-scale image recognition, in: 3rd International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR, 2015.
  49. D. Small, F. Holecz, D. Nuesch, Combination of ascending/descending ERS-1 InSAR data for calibration and validation, in: 1995 Inter- national Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium, IGARSS '95. Quantitative Remote Sensing for Science and Applications, volume 1, 1995, pp. 553-555 vol.
  50. S. Sniazhko, Uncertainty in decision-making: A review of the inter- national business literature, Cogent Business & Management 6 (2019) 1650692.
  51. H. K. Svein Solberg, S. Puliti, Age-independent site index mapping with repeated single-tree airborne laser scanning, Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research 34 (2019) 763-770.
  52. C. Szegedy, A. Toshev, D. Erhan, Deep neural networks for object detection, in: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS), volume 26, 2013.
  53. M. O. Turkoglu, S. D'Aronco, G. Perich, F. Liebisch, C. Streit, K. Schindler, J. D. Wegner, Crop mapping from image time series: deep learning with multi-scale label hierarchies, arXiv preprint arXiv:2102.08820 (2021a). · arXiv
  54. M. O. Turkoglu, S. D'Aronco, J. Wegner, K. Schindler, Gating revisited: Deep multi-layer RNNs that can be trained, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence (2021b).
  55. A. Tyukavina, A. Baccini, M. Hansen, P. Potapov, S. Stehman, R. Houghton, A. Krylov, S. Turubanova, S. Goetz, Aboveground carbon loss in natural and managed tropical forests from 2000 to 2012, Environmental Research Letters 10 (2015) 074002.
  56. L. Wang, K. A. Scott, L. Xu, D. A. Clausi, Sea ice concentration estimation during melt from dual-pol SAR scenes using deep con- volutional neural networks: A case study, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 54 (2016) 4524-4533.
  57. M. Welling, Y. W. Teh, Bayesian learning via stochastic gradient Langevin dynamics, in: Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on International Conference on Machine Learning, ICML'11, 2011, p. 681-688.
  58. P. J. Werbos, Applications of advances in nonlinear sensitivity anal- ysis, in: R. F. Drenick, F. Kozin (Eds.), System Modeling and Optimization, 1982.
  59. A. G. Wilson, P. Izmailov, Bayesian deep learning and a probabilistic perspective of generalization, in: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, volume 33, 2020.
  60. S. Xie, R. Girshick, P. Dollár, Z. Tu, K. He, Aggregated residual transformations for deep neural networks, in: 2017 IEEE Confer- ence on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2017, pp. 5987-5995.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Becker, A., Russo, S., Puliti, S., Lang, N., Schindler, K., & Wegner, J. D.
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2021
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2111.13154
arXiv
2111.13154
References
0
Type
Preprint
Licence
arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/

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