2012
DOI: 10.1080/01431161.2012.705443
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Automatic landslide detection from remote-sensing imagery using a scene classification method based on BoVW and pLSA

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
106
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 227 publications
(107 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
1
106
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The "object-oriented" approach, however, groups image pixels into homogeneous objects, with shape, size, neighboring, and textural features in addition to spectral information (Aksoy et al, 2012). With both approaches, supervised and unsupervised classification schemes have been adopted, based on algorithms such as maximum likelihood (Nichol et al, 2005;Borghuis et al, 2007;Danneels et al, 2007), K nearest neighbor (Cheng et al, 2013;Li et al, 2013), artificial neural networks (Nichol et al, 2005;Danneels et al, 2007;Moosavi et al, 2014), random forests , or support vector machines (SVMs; Pisani et al, 2012;Van Den Eeckhaut et al, 2012;Moosavi et al, 2014). Novel object-based approaches for automated landslide mapping include the classification of different landslide types (Martha et al, 2010), identification of landslides from panchromatic imagery only through strong reliance on texture measures , or the detection and mapping of forested landslides resorting to lidar data (Van Den Eeckhaut et al, 2012).…”
Section: Automated Methods For Landslide Mappingmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The "object-oriented" approach, however, groups image pixels into homogeneous objects, with shape, size, neighboring, and textural features in addition to spectral information (Aksoy et al, 2012). With both approaches, supervised and unsupervised classification schemes have been adopted, based on algorithms such as maximum likelihood (Nichol et al, 2005;Borghuis et al, 2007;Danneels et al, 2007), K nearest neighbor (Cheng et al, 2013;Li et al, 2013), artificial neural networks (Nichol et al, 2005;Danneels et al, 2007;Moosavi et al, 2014), random forests , or support vector machines (SVMs; Pisani et al, 2012;Van Den Eeckhaut et al, 2012;Moosavi et al, 2014). Novel object-based approaches for automated landslide mapping include the classification of different landslide types (Martha et al, 2010), identification of landslides from panchromatic imagery only through strong reliance on texture measures , or the detection and mapping of forested landslides resorting to lidar data (Van Den Eeckhaut et al, 2012).…”
Section: Automated Methods For Landslide Mappingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Ideally, pre-event and post-event images should be acquired at the same time of the year and with similar view angle and solar illumination, but this is often not feasible (Guzzetti et al, 2012). Semiautomated approaches to landslide mapping can be classed, according to the type of image element used, as "pixel based" (e.g., Chang et al, 2007;Yang and Chen, 2010;Chini et al, 2011;Cheng et al, 2013;Mondini et al, 2013Mondini et al, , 2011a or "object based" (e.g., Aksoy et al, 2012;Holbling et al, 2012Holbling et al, , 2015Lacroix et al, 2013;Lahousse et al, 2011;Lu et al, 2011;Martha et al, 2010Martha et al, , 2011Martha et al, , 2013Stumpf et al, 2011Stumpf et al, , 2014Van Den Eeckhaut et al, 2012). When applied to very high spatial resolution images, pixel-based methods often exhibit a "salt and pepper" appearance (Van Westen et al, 2008;Guzzetti et al, 2012) which requires image post-processing.…”
Section: Automated Methods For Landslide Mappingmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Firstly, low-level features, such as spectral, geometrical, and textural image features, are widely used in image analyses [11], but they are weak in characterizing functional zones which are usually composed of diverse objects with variant characteristics [12]. Then, middle-level features, including object semantics [4,8], visual elements [7], and bag-of-visual-word (BOVW) representations [13], are more effective than low-level features in representing functional zones [7], but they ignore spatial and contextual information of objects, leading to inaccurate recognition results. To resolve this issue, Hu et al (2015) extracted high-level features using convolutional neural network (CNN) [10], which could measure contextual information and were more robust than visual features in recognizing functional zones [14,16].…”
Section: Technical Issuesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Finally, functional zones can be labeled with categories based on their features. Previous efforts at functional-zone analysis focus mainly on feature representations [9][10][11][12][13][14] and classification methods [4,15,16], but ignore zone segmentation. This is unfortunate because zone segmentation is an essential precursor to the other two steps of functional-zone analysis and is hence fundamental to the entire undertaking.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%