Accounting for Training Data Error in Machine Learning Applied to Earth Observations

Abstract

Remote sensing, or Earth Observation (EO), is increasingly used to understand Earth system dynamics and create continuous and categorical maps of biophysical properties and land cover, especially based on recent advances in machine learning (ML). ML models typically require large, spatially explicit training datasets to make accurate predictions. Training data (TD) are typically generated by digitizing polygons on high spatial-resolution imagery, by collecting in situ data, or by using pre-existing datasets. TD are often assumed to accurately represent the truth, but in practice almost always have error, stemming from (1) sample design, and (2) sample collection errors. The latter is particularly relevant for image-interpreted TD, an increasingly commonly used method due to its practicality and the increasing training sample size requirements of modern ML algorithms. TD errors can cause substantial errors in the maps created using ML algorithms, which may impact map use and interpretation. Despite these potential errors and their real-world consequences for map-based decisions, TD error is often not accounted for or reported in EO research. Here we review the current practices for collecting and handling TD. We identify the sources of TD error, and illustrate their impacts using several case studies representing different EO applications (infrastructure mapping, global surface flux estimates, and agricultural monitoring), and provide guidelines for minimizing and accounting for TD errors. To harmonize terminology, we distinguish TD from three other classes of data that should be used to create and assess ML models: training reference data, used to assess the quality of TD during data generation; validation data, used to iteratively improve models; and map reference data, used only for final accuracy assessment. We focus primarily on TD, but our advice is generally applicable to all four classes, and we ground our review in established best practices for map accuracy assessment literature. EO researchers should start by determining the tolerable levels of map error and appropriate error metrics. Next, TD error should be minimized during sample design by choosing a representative spatio-temporal collection strategy, by using spatially and temporally relevant imagery and ancillary data sources during TD creation, and by selecting a set of legend definitions supported by the data. Furthermore, TD error can be minimized during the collection of individual samples by using consensus-based collection strategies, by directly comparing interpreted training observations against expert-generated training reference data to derive TD error metrics, and by providing image interpreters with thorough application-specific training. We strongly advise that TD error is incorporated in model outputs, either directly in bias and variance estimates or, at a minimum, by documenting the sources and implications of error. TD should be fully documented and made available via an open TD repository, allowing others to replicate and assess its use. To guide researchers in this process, we propose three tiers of TD error accounting standards. Finally, we advise researchers to clearly communicate the magnitude and impacts of TD error on map outputs, with specific consideration given to the likely map audience.

Analyzing and Predicting Land Use and Land Cover Changes in New Jersey Using Multi-Layer Perceptron–Markov Chain Model

“…It shows that we achieved an accuracy rate of 83% with all variables. A skill value of 0.78 (Table 3a-c) is above the advised numbers suggested by the software developer (see tutorial [48,62]). The skill measure is the difference between the measured accuracy and the accuracy expected by chance.…”

Achieving Breakthroughs in Global Hydrologic Science by Unlocking the Power of Multisensor, Multidisciplinary Earth Observations

“…We must leverage these important advances, while remaining vigilant of the "black box" nature of some algorithms, so that we get the right answers for the right reasons (Kirchner, 2006). As the power of machine learning algorithms is limited by the availability of appropriate training data as well as explicitly addressing the physical processes, a critical problem is how to develop training data for approaches based on multidisciplinary, multisensor remote sensing (Elmes et al, 2020), particularly those that accurately characterize extreme events. Indeed, observational errors in training data can introduce significant bias in the resulting ML model prediction.…”

A review of land use/land cover change mapping in the China-Central Asia-West Asia economic corridor countries

“…(1) Generating reference data through visual interpolation was the most common method, but it could contain errors and time-consuming (Elmes et al, 2019). (2) Obtaining reference data via the field survey is the most accurate method, but it cannot be conducted in all areas because of the inaccessibility issues.…”