2020
DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.2002.02585
|View full text |Cite
Preprint
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Learning Hyperspectral Feature Extraction and Classification with ResNeXt Network

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…To compare the classification results of the proposed model, comparative experiments were conducted and the models used were SVM [37], 2D-CNN [38], 3D-CNN [39], Hybrid [22], DFFN [41], Bam-CM [42], ViT [26], SwinT [33], SSFTT [30], and CT Mixer [31].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To compare the classification results of the proposed model, comparative experiments were conducted and the models used were SVM [37], 2D-CNN [38], 3D-CNN [39], Hybrid [22], DFFN [41], Bam-CM [42], ViT [26], SwinT [33], SSFTT [30], and CT Mixer [31].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Clustering-based techniques do not require prior knowledge and they are commonly used for HSI unsupervised classification, but still face challenges due to high spectral resolution and the presence of complex spatial structures [7]. The optimal selection of spectral bands is one of the major tasks for the HSI classification and feature extraction (FE) is often used as a pre-processing step for HSI classification methods to address the high spectral resolution problem [8]. FE techniques for HSI analysis can be either supervised, such as embedded feature selection with support vector machines (EFS-SVM) [9], linear discriminant analysis (LDA) [10], or unsupervised, including principal component analysis (PCA) [11], mainfold learning [12], and maximum noise factoring (MNF) [13].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%