Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A fusion approach to classify hyperspectral oil spill data

  • Published:
Multimedia Tools and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Oil spills in the ocean are one of the major environmental concerns as they pose significant threat to the ecosystem. In the recent year’s hyperspectral sensors have been used to detect oil spills due to their ability to capture reflected solar signal with very narrow bandwidth, that enables to differentiate materials even with subtle signature differences. However high spectral dimensionality affects classification accuracy due to insufficient training samples. Conventional methods have dealt with this problem through band (or feature) selection or feature extraction (or transformation) approaches. In the case of an oil emulsion signal, as evident from the literature the oil characteristics are present only in certain bands of a spectral signature. Hence feature selection without focusing on right bands may lead to selecting features of less significance for target identification. Moreover, in feature extraction approaches during transformation from high dimensional space to low dimension space some of the important features could be lost. Hence, the proposed research takes advantage of different but complimentary benefits of both feature selection and feature extraction methods to obtain final features effectively. In the proposed research, features are selected by modelling the oil emulsion signal using derivative spectrum and calculation of partial sum of energies. Derivative spectrum represents variation in signal energies and calculation of partial sum of signal energies for each band facilitates the application of filters bank to capture oil sensitive signal characteristics. Feature extraction is done through wavelet transform by gradual multi-scale zooming of signals through partial analysis of time (space) frequencies. The obtained features are fused together and fed to Gaussian Mixture Model (GMM) classifier to classify oil emulsions. The proposed approach gives 5% to–10% higher classification accuracy as compared to some of the conventional techniques.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Abbrian RM, Carranza MM, Seto KL, Snyder SM, Franks PJ (2011) Deepwater horizon oil spill. Oceanography 24(3):294

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Alam MS, Sidike P (2012) Trends in oil spill detection via hyperspectral imaging. In: Electrical & Computer Engineering (ICECE), 2012 7th International Conference on. pp 858–862

  3. Brekke C, Solberg AH (2005) Oil spill detection by satellite remote sensing. Remote Sens Environ 95(1):1–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Byfield V, Boxall SR (1999) Thickness estimates and classification of surface oil using passive sensing at visible and near-infrared wavelengths. In: Geoscience and remote sensing symposium, 1999. IGARSS’99 Proceedings. IEEE 1999 International, vol. 3, pp 1475–1477

  5. Cariou C, Chehdi K, Le Moan S (2011) BandClust: an unsupervised band reduction method for hyperspectral remote sensing. IEEE Geosci Remote Sens Lett 8(3):565–569

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Cheriyadat A, Bruce LM (2003) Why principal component analysis is not an appropriate feature extraction method for hyperspectral data. In: Geoscience and remote sensing symposium, 2003. IGARSS’03. Proceedings. 2003 IEEE International vol. 6, pp 3420–3422

  7. Clark RN, Swayze GA, Leifer I, Livo KE, Kokaly R, Hoefen T, Lundeen S, Eastwood M, Green RO, Pearson N et al (2010) A method for quantitative mapping of thick oil spills using imaging spectroscopy. US Geological Survey Open-File Report 1167(2010):1–51

    Google Scholar 

  8. Cong L, Nutter B, Liang D (2012) Estimation of oil thickness and aging from hyperspectral signature. In: Image Analysis and Interpretation (SSIAI), 2012 IEEE Southwest Symposium on. pp 213–216

  9. Cortés G, Ben횤tez MC, Garc횤a L, Álvarez I, Ibanez JM (2016) A comparative study of dimensionality reduction algorithms applied to volcano-seismic signals. IEEE J Sel Top Appl Earth Obs Remote Sens 9(1):253–263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Crone TJ, Tolstoy M (2010) Magnitude of the 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil leak. Science 330(6004):634–634

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Danielsson P-E (1980) Euclidean distance mapping. Comput Graphics Image Process 14(3):227–248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Daubechies I (1990) The wavelet transform, time-frequency localization and signal analysis. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 36(5):961–1005

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. Dellaert F (2002) The expectation maximization algorithm. Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta

    Google Scholar 

  14. Donoho DL (2000) High-dimensional data analysis: the curses and blessings of dimensionality. AMS Math Challenges Lecture 1(2000):32

  15. Flaash UG (2009) Atmospheric correction module: QUAC and Flaash user guide v 4.7. ITT Visual Information Solutions Inc., Boulder

    Google Scholar 

  16. Griffin D, Lim J (1984) Signal estimation from modified short-time Fourier transform. IEEE Trans Acoust Speech Signal Process 32(2):236–243

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Hasan MR, Jamil M, Rahman MGRMS et al (2004) Speaker identification using mel frequency cepstral coefficients. Variations 1(4)

  18. Worldmaritimenews.com (2018) World Maritime News | The industry’s seaborne news provider. [online] Available at: https://worldmaritimenews.com. Accessed 26 Mar 2018

  19. Jain A, Zongker D (1997) Feature selection: evaluation, application, and small sample performance. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 19(2):153–158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Karathanassi V (2014) Spectral unmixing evaluation for oil spill characterization. Int J Remote Sens APPL 4(1):1–17

    Google Scholar 

  21. Kessler JD, Valentine DL, Redmond MC, Du M, Chan EW, Mendes SD, Quiroz EW, Villanueva CJ, Shusta SS, Werra LM et al (2011) A persistent oxygen anomaly reveals the fate of spilled methane in the deep Gulf of Mexico. Science 331(6015):312–315

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kira K, Rendell LA (1992) The feature selection problem: traditional methods and a new algorithm. In: AAAI vol. 2, pp 129–134

  23. Kirk JT (1994) Light and photosynthesis in aquatic ecosystems. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  24. Kokaly RF, Hoefen TM, Livo KE, Swayze GA, Leifer I, McCubbin IB, Eastwood ML, Green RO, Lundeen SR, Sarture CM, Steele D (2010) A rapid method for creating qualitative images indicative of thick oil emulsion on the ocean’s surface from imaging spectrometer data (No. 2010-1107). US Geol Surv. https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20101107

  25. Lammoglia T, de Souza Filho CR (2011) Spectroscopic characterization of oils yielded from Brazilian offshore basins: potential applications of remote sensing. Remote Sens Environ 115(10):2525–2535

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33:159–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Leifer I, Lehr WJ, Simecek-Beatty D, Bradley E, Clark R, Dennison P, Hu Y, Matheson S, Jones CE, Holt B et al (2012) State of the art satellite and airborne marine oil spill remote sensing: application to the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill. Remote Sens Environ 124:185–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Logan B et al (2000) Mel Frequency cepstral coefficients for music modeling. In: ISMIR

  29. Cryptography P (2013) Mel frequency cepstral coefficient (mfcc) tutorial. practicalcryptography. com. [Online]. Available: http://practicalcryptography.com/miscellaneous/machinelearning/guide-mel-frequencycepstral-coefficients-mfccs. Accessed 5 Dec 2017

  30. Plaza J, Pérez R, Plaza A, Mart횤nez P, Valencia D (2005) Mapping oil spills on sea water using spectral mixture analysis of hyperspectral image data. In: Optics East 2005, pp 599509

  31. Roch MA, Soldevilla MS, Burtenshaw JC, Henderson EE, Hildebrand JA (2007) Gaussian mixture model classification of odontocetes in the Southern California bight and the Gulf of California. J Acoust Soc Am 121(3):1737–1748

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Salem F, Kafatos M (2001) Hyperspectral image analysis for oil spill mitigation. In: Paper presented at the 22nd Asian conference on remote sensing vol. 5, p 9

  33. Shaw G, Manolakis D (2002) Signal processing for hyperspectral image exploitation. IEEE Signal Process Mag 19(1):12–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Sohn Y, Rebello NS (2002) Supervised and unsupervised spectral angle classifiers. Photogramm Eng Remote Sens 68(12):1271–1282

    Google Scholar 

  35. Solberg AHS (2012) Remote sensing of ocean oil-spill pollution. Proc IEEE 100(10):2931–2945

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Sun S, Hu C, Feng L, Swayze GA, Holmes J, Graettinger G, MacDonald I, Garcia O, Leifer I (2016) Oil slick morphology derived from AVIRIS measurements of the deepwater horizon oil spill: implications for spatial resolution requirements of remote sensors. Mar Pollut Bull 103(1):276–285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Tsai F, Philpot W (1998) Derivative analysis of hyperspectral data. Remote Sens Environ 66(1):41–51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Walker JS (2008) A primer on wavelets and their scientific applications. CRC Press, Philadelphia

    Book  Google Scholar 

  39. Wettle M, Daniel PJ, Logan GA, Thankappan M (2009) Assessing the effect of hydrocarbon oil type and thickness on a remote sensing signal: a sensitivity study based on the optical properties of two different oil types and the HYMAP and Quickbird sensors. Remote Sens Environ 113(9):2000–2010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Willett RM, Duarte MF, Davenport MA, Baraniuk RG (2014) Sparsity and structure in hyperspectral imaging: sensing, reconstruction, and target detection. IEEE Signal Process Mag 31(1):116–126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Xu J, Ariyaeeinia A, Sotudeh R, Ahmad Z (2005) Pre-processing speech signals in FPGAs. In: 6th Int Conf on ASIC 2005, ASICON 2005 2

  42. Yuhas RH, Goetz AF, Boardman JW (1992) Discrimination among semi-arid landscape endmembers using the spectral angle mapper (SAM) algorithm. In Proc. Summaries 3rd Annu. JPL Airborne Geosci Workshop (pp 147–149)

  43. Zhang L, Zhang L, Tao D, Huang X (2013) Tensor discriminative locality alignment for hyperspectral image spectral–spatial feature extraction. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens 51(1):242–256

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Zheng F, Zhang G, Song Z (2001) Comparison of different implementations of MFCC. J Comput Sci Technol 16(6):582–589

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their comments and suggestions, which greatly helped us in improving the technical quality and presentation of our manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Research & Development Centre, Bharathiar University, Coimbatore, India

    Jacintha Menezes

  2. Manipal Education Academy, Manipal, Karnataka 576104, India

    Nagesh Poojary

Authors
  1. Jacintha Menezes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nagesh Poojary
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jacintha Menezes.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Menezes, J., Poojary, N. A fusion approach to classify hyperspectral oil spill data. Multimed Tools Appl 79, 5399–5418 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-018-6709-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-018-6709-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation