The Application of the Concept of Indicative Neighbourhood on Landsat ETM + Images and Orthophotos Using Circular and Annulus Kernels

  • Madli Linder
  • Kalle Remm
  • Hendrik Proosa
Part of the Lecture Notes in Geoinformation and Cartography book series (LNGC)


We calculated the mean and standard deviation from Landsat ETM+ red and panchromatic channels, and from red tone and lightness values of orthophotos within several kernel radii, in order to recognize three different variables: multinomial—forest stand type (deciduous, coniferous, mixed), numerical—forest stand coverage, binomial—the presence/absence of orchid species Epipactis palustris. Case-based iterative weighting of observations and their features in the software system Constud was used. Goodness-of-fit of predictions was estimated using leave-one-out cross validation. Cohen’s kappa index of agreement was applied to nominal variables, and RMSE was used for stand coverage. The novel aspect is the inclusion of additional information from particular neighbourhood zones (indicative neighbourhood) using annulus kernels, and combining those with focal circular ones. The characteristics of neighbourhood in conjunction with local image pattern enabled more accurate estimations than the application of a single kernel. The best combinations most often contained a 10ldots25 m radius focal kernel and an annulus kernel having internal and external radii ranging from 25 to 200 m. The optimal radii applied on the Landsat image were usually larger than those for the orthophotos. The optimal kernel size did not depend on either reflectance band or target variable.


indicative neighbourhood case-based reasoning Landsat ETM+ orthophotos kernel size 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Aha DW (1998) The omnipresence of case-based reasoning in science and application. Knowledge-Based Systems 11:261–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Atkinson PM, Lewis P (2000) Geostatistical classification for remote sensing: An introduction. Computers & Geosciences 26:361–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chica-Olmo M, Abarca-Hernandez F (2000) Computing geostatistical image texture for remotely sensed data classification. Computers & Geosciences 26:373–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Coops N, Culvenor D (2000) Utilizing local variance of simulated high spatial resolution imagery to predict spatial pattern of forest stands. Remote Sensing of Environment 71:248–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dillworth ME, Whistler JL, Merchant JW (1994) Measuring landscape structure using geographic and geometric windows. Photogrammetric Engineering & Remote Sensing 60:1215–1224Google Scholar
  6. Franklin SE, Hall RJ, Moskal LM, Maudie AJ, Lavigne MB (2000) Incorporating texture into classification of forest species composition from airborne multispectral images. International Journal of Remote Sensing 21(1):61–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Franklin SE, Wulder, MA, Lavigne MB (1996) Automated derivation of geographic window sizes for use in remote sensing digital image texture analysis. Computers & Geosciences 22(6):665–673CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Haralick RM, Shanmugam K, Dinstein I (1973) Textural features for image classification. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics SMC-3(6):610–621CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. He H, Collet C (1999) Combining spectral and textural features for multispectral image classification with Artificial Neural Networks. International Archives of Photogrammetry & Remote Sensing 32(7-4-3 W6), Valladolid, Spain, 3-4 June 1999:175-181Google Scholar
  10. Hodgson ME (1998) What size window for image classification? A cognitive perspective. Photogrammetric Engineering & Remote Sensing 64(8):797–807Google Scholar
  11. Hsu S (1978) Texture-tone analysis for automated land-use mapping. Photogrammetric Engineering & Remote Sensing 44(11):1393–1404Google Scholar
  12. Kayitakire F, Hamel C, Defourny P (2006) Retrieving forest structure variables based on image texture analysis and IKONOS-2 imagery. Remote Sensing of Environment 102:390–401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Lark RM (1996) Geostatistical description of texture on an aerial photograph for discriminating classes of land cover. International Journal of Remote Sensing 17(11):2115–2133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Laurent EJ, Shia H, Gatziolis D, LeBoutonc JP, Walters MB, Liu J (2005) Using the spatial and spectral precision of satellite imagery to predict wildlife occurrence patterns. Remote Sensing of Environment 97:249–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Mökelö H, Pekkarinen A (2001) Estimation of timber volume at the sample plot level by means of image segmentation and Landsat TM imagery. Remote Sensing of Environment 77:66–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Park Y-J, Kim B-C, Chun S-H (2006) New knowledge extraction technique using probability for case-based reasoning: application to medical diagnosis. Expert Systems 23(1):2–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Remm K (2004) Case-based predictions for species and habitat mapping. Ecological Modelling 177:259–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Remm K (2005) Correlations between forest stand diversity and landscape pattern in Otepöö NP, Estonia. Journal for Nature Conservation 13(2-3):137–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Remm K, Luud A (2003) Regression and point pattern models of moose distribution in relation to habitat distribution and human influence in Ida-Viru county, Estonia. Journal for Nature Conservation 11:197–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ricotta C, Corona P, Marchetti M, Chirici G, Innamorati S (2003) LaDy: software for assessing local landscape diversity profiles of raster land cover maps using geographic windows. Environmental Modelling & Software 18:373–378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Woodcock CE, Strahler AH (1987) The factor of scale in remote sensing. Remote Sensing the Environment 21:311–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Yu Q, Gong P, Clinton N, Biging G, Kelly M, Schirokauer D (2006) Object-based Detailed Vegetation Classification with Airborne High Spatial Resolution Remote Sensing Imagery. Photogrammetric Engineering & Remote Sensing 72(7):799–811Google Scholar
  23. Zawadzki J, Cieszewski CJ, Zasada M, Lowe RC (2005) Applying geostatistics for investigations of forest ecosystems using remote sensing imagery. Silva Fennica 39(4):599–617Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Madli Linder
    • 1
  • Kalle Remm
    • 1
  • Hendrik Proosa
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Ecology and Earth SciencesUniversity of TartuEstonia

Personalised recommendations