A comparative study of supervised classifiers on a subscene in Junagadh district, Gujarat
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
This paper describes the results of a comparative study of five classifiers viz., maximum likelihood, modified maximum likelihood, minimum distance to mean. Fisher and min-max, for classifying a subscene of Junagadh district using Landsat Thematic Mapper (TM) data. The kappa coefficient of agreement (k) and per cent correctly classified pixels for training data are used as measures of overall performance. It is observed that maximum likelihood and modified maximum likelihood classifiers perform better than the other three classifiers for this data set. Band combinations (3, 4, S) and (2, 3, 4, S) perform better than the usual combination (1,2,3,4), possibly because of presence of middle infrared band (band 5) on a scene dominated by vegetation cover. The band combination (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7) performed the best.
- Beaubien, J (1979) Forest type mapping from Landsat digital data. Photogr. Engg. and Rem. Sens. 45: pp. 1135-1144
- Chang J K and Dwyer S J, 1973. New multiclass classification method : Modified maximum likelihood decision rule.Proceedings of the first International Joint Conference on Pattern Recognition. Washington D.C., October 30–November 1, 334–339.
- Cohen, J (1960) A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement 20: pp. 37-46 CrossRef
- Craig R G. 1979. Autocorrelation in Landsat data.Proceedings of the 13th Int. Symp. on Rem. Sens. Environment, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1517–1524.
- Craig R G and Labovitz M L 1980. Sources of variation in Landsat autocorrelation,Proceedings of the 14th Int. Symp. on Rem. Sens, of Environment. Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1755–1767.
- Dadhwal V K, Parihar J S, Medhavy D S, Ruhal D S and Jarwal S D 1987. Wheat acreage estimation of Haryana for 1986–87, using Landsat MSS data.Scientific Note : IRS-UP/SAC/CPF/SN/ 15/87, 26.
- Diaconis, P, Efron, B (1983) Computer intensive methods in statistics. Scientific American 248: pp. 116-130 CrossRef
- Geisser, S (1981) Sample reuse procedures for prediction of the unobserved portion of a partially observed vector. Biometrika. 68: pp. 243-250 CrossRef
- Haralick, R M, Shanmugam, K, Dinstein, I (1973) Textural features for image classification. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics SMC-3: pp. 610-621 CrossRef
- Hudson, W D, Ramm, C W (1987) Correct formulation of the kappa coefficient of agreement. Photogr. Engg. and Rem. Sens. 53: pp. 421-422
- Jain, A K, Dubes, R C, Chen, C (1987) Bootstrap techniques for error estimation. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence PAMI-9: pp. 628-633 CrossRef
- Jenson, JR (1986) Introductory digital image processing : a remote sensing perspective. Prentice-Hall, New Jersey
- Nelson, R F, Latty, R S, Mott, G (1984) Classifying northern forests using Thematic Mapper Simulator data. Photogr. Engg. and Rem. Sens. 50: pp. 607-617
- Potdar M B, Kalubarme M H, Sharma R, Biswas B C, Dubey RC and Bhandari S G 1987. Remote sensing based hectarage estimation of semi-arid tropical crops : A case study of 1986 rabi sorghum in Solapur district.Scientific Note: IRS-UP/SAC/CPF/SN/14/87. 23p.
- Rosenfield, G H, Fitzpatrick-Lins, R (1986) A coefficient of agreement as a measure of thematic classification accuracy. Photo. Engg. and Rem. Sens 52: pp. 223-227
- Sheffield, C (1985) Selecting band combinations from multispectral data. Photogr. Engg. and Rem. Sens. 51: pp. 681-687
- Skidmore, A K, Turner, B J (1988) Forest mapping accuracies are improved using a supervised nonparametric classifier with SPOT data. Photogr. Engg. and Rem. Sens. 54: pp. 1415-1421
- A comparative study of supervised classifiers on a subscene in Junagadh district, Gujarat
Journal of the Indian Society of Remote Sensing
Volume 18, Issue 3 , pp 18-24
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer India
- Additional Links