Advertisement

Geosciences Journal

, Volume 22, Issue 4, pp 653–665 | Cite as

Land cover classification analysis of volcanic island in Aleutian Arc using an artificial neural network (ANN) and a support vector machine (SVM) from Landsat imagery

  • Prima Riza Kadavi
  • Chang-Wook LeeEmail author
Article

Abstract

Land cover (LC) mapping is an important research topic with many applications in remote sensing. Especially, for volcanic areas where direct field access is difficult, remote sensing data are needed to map LC. Volcanic areas are attractive targets for LC mapping because any spread of volcanic eruptions must be monitored. When creating LC maps, it is important to minimize errors because such errors compromise analyses using these maps. Here, we analyzed multispectral data from Mount Kanaga, Mount Fourpeaked, Mount Pavlof, and Mount Augustine using two different classifiers, an artificial neural network (ANN) and a support vector machine (SVM). To this end, we employed Landsat 8 imagery, which features four LC classes: outcrops (pyroclastic deposits, volcanic rock, sand, etc.), vegetation, water bodies, and snow. We found that the SVM was more accurate than the ANN. For Mount Kanaga, the SVM afforded the best classification accuracy (98.08%), 9.14% better than the ANN (88.94%); for the other volcanoes, the accuracy of the two methods did not differ significantly. Overall, both classifiers accurately distinguished products of volcanic eruption (outcrops) from other LC. Thus, both the ANN and SVM can be used for LC classification.

Key words

land cover classification Landsat imagery Artificial Neural Network Support Vector Machine 

References

  1. Anderson, J.R., Hardy E.E., Roach J.T., and Witmer R.E., 1976, A Land Use and Land Cover Classification System for Use with Remote Sensor Data. Geological Survey Professional Paper 964, US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 28 p.Google Scholar
  2. Barton A.F. and Xue, Y., 2017, Machine learning predictions of passive microwave brightness temperature over snow-covered land using the special sensor microwave imager (SSM/I). Physical Geography, 38, 176–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bishop, C.M., 1995, Neural networks for pattern recognition. Oxford University Press, New York, 482 p.Google Scholar
  4. Butt A., Shabbir R., Ahmad S.S., and Aziz N., 2015, Land use change mapping and analysis using remote sensing and GIS: a case study of Simly watershed, Islamabad, Pakistan. The Egyptian Journal of Remote Sensing and Space Science, 18, 251–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cohen, J.A., 1960, A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 37–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Collobert, R. and J. Weston., 2008, A unified architecture for natural language processing: deep neural networks with multitask learning. Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Machine learning, Helsinki, Jul. 5–9, p. 160–167.Google Scholar
  7. Dam, H.H., Abbass, H.A., Lokan, C., and Yao, X., 2008, Neural-based learning classifier systems. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 20, 26–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ding, S. and Chen, L., 2009, Classification of hyperspectral remote sensing images with support vector machines and particle swarm optimization. International Conference on Information Engineering and Computer Science, Wulan, Dec. 19–20, IEEE, p. 1–5.Google Scholar
  9. Ediriwickrema, J. and Khorram, S., 1997, Hierarchical maximum-likelihood classification for improved accuracies. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 35, 810–816.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Elhag, M., 2010, Land suitability for afforestation and nature conservation practices using remote sensing & GIS techniques. Catrina Journal, 6, 11–17.Google Scholar
  11. Elhag, M., 2016b, Evaluation of different soil salinity mapping using remote sensing techniques in arid ecosystems, Saudi Arabia. Journal of Sensors, Article ID 7596175. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/7596175 Google Scholar
  12. Eom, J. and Lee, C.W., 2017, Analysis on the area of deltaic Barrier Island and suspended sediments concentration in Nakdong River using satellite images. Korean Journal of Remote Sensing, 33, 201–211.Google Scholar
  13. Foody, G.M. and Mathur, A., 2004, A relative evaluation of multiclass image classification by support vector machines. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience Remote Sensing, 42, 1335–1343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fournelle, J.H., Marsh, B.D., and Myers, J.D., 1994, Age, character, and significance of Aleutian arc volcanism. In: Plafker, G. and Berg, H.C. (eds.), The Geology of Alaska. Geological Society of America, Geology of North America, Boulder, G-1, p. 723–757.Google Scholar
  15. Gibson, D.D. and Byrd, G.V., 2007, Birds of the Aleutian Islands, Alaska. Nuttall Ornthological Club, Cambridge; American Ornithologists’ Union, Washington, 351 p.Google Scholar
  16. Grow, J.A., 1973, Crustal and upper mantle structure of the central Aleutian arc. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 84, 2169–2192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gualtieri, J.A. and Cromp, R.F., 1999, Support vector machines for hyperspectral remote sensing classification. The 27th AIPR Workshop: Advances in Computer-Assisted Recognition, Washington DC, Jan. 29, International Society for Optics and Photonics, 3584, p. 221–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kadavi, P.R., Lee, W.J., and Lee, C.W., 2017, Analysis of the pyroclastic flow deposits of Mounts Sinabung and Merapi using Landsat imagery and the artificial neural network approach. Applied Science, 7, 935. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/app7090935 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kavzoglu, T. and Colkesen, I., 2009, A kernel functions analysis for Support Vector Machines for land cover classification. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation, 11, 352–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kay, S.M., Kay, R.W., and Citron, G.P., 1982, Tectonic controls on tholeiitic and calc-alkaline magmatism in the Aleutian arc. Journal of Geophysical Research, 87, 4051–4072.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Khorram, S., Biging, G.S., Chrisman, N.R., Colby, D.R., Congalton, R.G., Dobson, J.E., Ferguson, R.L., Goodchild, M.F., Jensen, J.R., and Mace, T.H., 1999, Accuracy assessment of remote sensing-derived change detection. American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, Monograph Series, 65 p.Google Scholar
  22. Koomen, E. and Stillwell, J., 2007, Modelling land-use change. In: Koomen, E., Stillwell, J., Bakema, A., and Scholten, H.J. (eds.), Modelling Land- Use Change: Progress and Applications. Springer Netherlands, p. 1–22.Google Scholar
  23. Lee, S., Kim, G., and Lee, C.W., 2016, Preliminary study for tidal flat detection in Yeongjong-do according to tide level using Landsat images. Korean Journal of Remote Sensing, 32, 639–645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Li, C., Wang, J., Wang, L., Hu, L., and Gong, P., 2014, Comparison of classification algorithms and training sample sizes in urban land classification with Landsat thematic mapper imagery. Remote Sensing, 6, 964–983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lu, D., Batistella, M., Li, G., Moran, E., Dutra, L.V., Freitas, C.C., and Sant’Anna, S.J., 2012, Land use/cover classification in the Brazilian Amazon using satellite images. Pesquisa Agropecuaria Brasileira, 47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0100-204X2012000900004
  26. Liu, Y., Zhang, B., Wang, L-m., and Wang, N., 2013, A self-trained semi supervised SVM approach to the remote sensing land cover classification. Computers and Geoscience, 59, 98–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Melgani, F. and Bruzzone, L., 2004, Classification of hyperspectral remote sensing images with support vector machines. IEEE Transactions on geoscience and remote sensing, 42, 1778–1790.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mountrakis, G., Im, J., and Ogole, C., 2011, Support vector machines in remote sensing: a review. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, 66, 247–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Myers, J.D., 1988, Possible petrogenetic relations between low- and high-MgO Aleutian basalts. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 100, 1040–1053.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Pal, M. and Mather, P., 2005, Support vector machines for classification in remote sensing. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 26, 1007–1011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Pradhan, B., 2013, A comparative study on the predictive ability of the decision tree, support vector machine and neuro-fuzzy models in landslide susceptibility mapping using GIS. Computers and Geoscience, 51, 350–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Richards, J.A., 1999, Remote Sensing Digital Image Analysis. Springer, Berlin, 494 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Scholl, D.W., Vallier, T.L., and Stevenson, A.J., 1987, Geologic evolution and petroleum geology of the Aleutian Ridge. In: Scholl, D.W., Grantz, A., and Vedder, J.G. (eds.), Geology and Resource Potential of the Continental Margin of Western North America and Adjacent Ocean Basins–Beaufort Sea to Baja California. Circum-Pacific Council for Energy and Mineral Resources, Houston, p. 123–155.Google Scholar
  34. Shao, Y. and Lunetta, R.S., 2012, Comparison of support vector machine, neural network, and CART algorithms for the land-cover classification using limited training data points. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, 70, 78–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Tehrany, M.S., Pradhan, B., and Jebur, M.N., 2014, Flood susceptibility mapping using a novel ensemble weights-of-evidence and support vector machine models in GIS. Journal of Hydrology, 512, 332–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Ullah, S., Farooq, M., Shafique, M., Siyab, M.A., Kareem, F., and Dees, M., 2016, Spatial assessment of forest cover and land-use changes in the Hindu-Kush mountain ranges of northern Pakistan. Journal of Mountain Science, 13, 1229–1237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Vapnik, V., 2000, The nature of statistical learning theory. Springer-Verlag, New York, 314 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Weller, A.F., Harris, A.J., and Ware, J.A., 2006, Artificial neural networks as potential classification tools for dinoflagellate cyst images: a case using the self-organizing map clustering algorithm. Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology, 141, 287–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wilson, F.H., Hults, C.P., Mull, C.G, and Karl, S.M., 2015, Geologic map of Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Map 3340 (scale 1:1,584,000). 2 sheets, Pamphlet, 196 p. http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/sim3340 Google Scholar
  40. Xiu, L.N. and Liu, X.G., 2003, Current status and future direction of the study on artificial neural network classification processing in remote sensing. Remote Sensing Technology and Application, 18, 339–345.Google Scholar
  41. Yongzhu, X., Zhengdong, Z., and Feng, C., 2010, Comparison of artificial neural network and support vector machine methods for urban land use/cover classifications from remote sensing images a case study of Guangzhou, South China. International Conference on Computer Application and System Modeling (ICCASM), Taiyuan, Oct. 22–24, IEEE, 13, p. 52–56.Google Scholar
  42. Zhai, S. and Jiang, T., 2014, A novel particle swarm optimization trained support vector machine for automatic sense-through-foliage target recognition system. Knowledge-Based System, 65, 50–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Association of Korean Geoscience Societies and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Science EducationKangwon National UniversityChuncheon-siRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations