A New Scheme for Land Cover Classification in Aerial Images: Combining Extended Dependency Tree-HMM and Unsupervised Segmentation

  • Mohamed El Yazid BoudarenEmail author
  • Abdel Belaïd
Part of the Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering book series (LNEE, volume 60)


An important challenge to any image pixels classification system is to correctly assign each pixel to its proper class without blurring edges delimiting neighboring regions. In this paper, we present an aerial image mapping approach that advantageously combines unsupervised segmentation with a supervised Markov model based recognition. The originality of the proposed system carries on three concepts: the introduction of an auto-adaptive circular-like window size while applying our stochastic classification to preserve region edges, the extension of the Dependency Tree–HMM to permit the computation of likelihood probability on windows of different shapes and sizes and a mechanism that checks the coherence of the indexing by integrating both segmentations results: from unsupervised over segmentation, regions are assigned to the predominating class with a focus on inner region pixels. To validate our approach, we achieved experiments on real world high resolution aerial images. The obtained results outperform those obtained by supervised classification alone.


Land cover classification hidden Markov model aerial images 


  1. 1.
    Mesev, V.: Remotely Sensed Cities. Taylor & Francis, London (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Thomas, N.C., Congalton, R.: A comparison of urban mapping methods using high-resolution digital imagery. Photogrammet. Eng. Remote Sens. 69(9), 963–972 (2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    De Jong, S.M., Freek, D.M.: Remote Sensing ImageAnalysis: Including the Spatial Domain. Springer, Berlin (2006)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jensen, J.: Introductory Digital Image Processing. Prentice-Hall, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Levin, E., Pieraccini, R.: Dynamic planar warping for optical character recognition. IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing 3, 149–152 (1992)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Permuter, H., Francos, J., Jermyn, I.H.: Gaussian mixture models for texture and colour for image database retrieval. IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing 3, 569–572 (2003)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Noda, H., Mahdad Shirazi, N., Kawaguchi, E.: MRF based texture segmentation using wavelet decomposed images. Pattern Recog. 35, 771–782 (2002)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pieczynski, W.: Markov models in image processing. Traitement de Signal 20(3), 255–277 (2003)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    RGD73-74, 2008, Régie de Gestion des Données des Deux Savoies.
  10. 10.
    Boudaren, M.Y., Labed, A., Boulfekhar, A.A., Amara, Y.: Hidden Markov model based classification of natural objects in aerial pictures. IAENG International Conference on Signal and Image Engineering, pp. 718–721, London, 2–4 July 2008Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Merialdo, B.: Dependency Tree Hidden Markov Models. Research Report RR-05-128, Institut Eurecom (2005)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Merialdo, B., Jiten, J., Galmar, E., Huet, B.: A new approach to probabilistic image modeling with multidimensional hidden Markov models. Adap. Multimed. Retriev. 95–107 (2006)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Comaniciu, D., Meer, P.: Mean shift: A robust approach towards feature space analysis. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 24(5), 603–619 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Meer, P., Georgescu, B.: Edge detection with embedded confidence. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 23(12), 1351–1365 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Applied Maths Lab., Military Polytechnic SchoolAlgiersAlgeria
  2. 2.LORIA Lab., Read TeamVandoeuvre-lès-NancyFrance

Personalised recommendations