Ontologies to interpret remote sensing images: why do we need them?

被引:49
作者
Arvor, Damien [1 ]
Belgiu, Mariana [2 ]
Falomir, Zoe [3 ]
Mougenot, Isabelle [4 ]
Durieux, Laurent [4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Rennes, UMR LETG CNRS 6554, Rennes, France
[2] Univ Twente, Fac Geoinformat Sci & Earth Observat ITC, Enschede, Netherlands
[3] Univ Bremen, Bremen Spatial Cognit Ctr, Fac Comp Sci & Math, Bremen, Germany
[4] Univ Montpellier, IRD, UMR Espace Dev, Montpellier, France
关键词
ontologies; remote sensing; knowledge-driven approach; geographic features; image interpretation; cognitive semantics; sensory gap; semantic gap; LAND-COVER; CLASSIFICATION; KNOWLEDGE; REPRESENTATION; EARTH; FORMALIZATION; HARMONIZATION; UNCERTAINTY; VALIDATION; RETRIEVAL;
D O I
10.1080/15481603.2019.1587890
中图分类号
P9 [自然地理学];
学科分类号
0705 ; 070501 ;
摘要
The development of new sensors and easier access to remote sensing data are significantly transforming both the theory and practice of remote sensing. Although data-driven approaches based on innovative algorithms and enhanced computing capacities are gaining importance to process big Earth Observation data, the development of knowledge-driven approaches is still considered by the remote sensing community to be one of the most important directions of their research. In this context, the future of remote sensing science should be supported by knowledge representation techniques such as ontologies. However, ontology-based remote sensing applications still have difficulty capturing the attention of remote sensing experts. This is mainly because of the gap between remote sensing experts' expectations of ontologies and their real possible contribution to remote sensing. This paper provides insights to help reduce this gap. To this end, the conceptual limitations of the knowledge-driven approaches currently used in remote sensing science are clarified first. Then, the different modes of definition of geographic concepts, their duality, vagueness and ambiguity, and the sensory and semantic gaps are discussed in order to explain why ontologies can help address these limitations. In particular, this paper focuses on the capacity of ontologies to represent both symbolic and numeric knowledge, to reason based on cognitive semantics and to share knowledge on the interpretation of remote sensing images. Finally, a few recommendations are provided for remote sensing experts to comprehend the advantages of ontologies in interpreting satellite images.
引用
收藏
页码:911 / 939
页数:29
相关论文
共 119 条
[31]  
COHN AG, 2007, QUALITATIVE SPATIAL
[32]   You know what land cover is but does anyone else? ... an investigation into semantic and ontological confusion [J].
Comber, A ;
Fisher, P ;
Wadsworth, R .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF REMOTE SENSING, 2005, 26 (01) :223-228
[33]   The SSN ontology of the W3C semantic sensor network incubator group [J].
Compton, Michael ;
Barnaghi, Payam ;
Bermudez, Luis ;
Garcia-Castro, Raul ;
Corcho, Oscar ;
Cox, Simon ;
Graybeal, John ;
Hauswirth, Manfred ;
Henson, Cory ;
Herzog, Arthur ;
Huang, Vincent ;
Janowicz, Krzysztof ;
Kelsey, W. David ;
Le Phuoc, Danh ;
Lefort, Laurent ;
Leggieri, Myriam ;
Neuhaus, Holger ;
Nikolov, Andriy ;
Page, Kevin ;
Passant, Alexandre ;
Sheth, Amit ;
Taylor, Kerry .
JOURNAL OF WEB SEMANTICS, 2012, 17 :25-32
[34]   A REVIEW OF ASSESSING THE ACCURACY OF CLASSIFICATIONS OF REMOTELY SENSED DATA [J].
CONGALTON, RG .
REMOTE SENSING OF ENVIRONMENT, 1991, 37 (01) :35-46
[35]   Global Land Cover Mapping: A Review and Uncertainty Analysis [J].
Congalton, Russell G. ;
Gu, Jianyu ;
Yadav, Kamini ;
Thenkabail, Prasad ;
Ozdogan, Mutlu .
REMOTE SENSING, 2014, 6 (12) :12070-12093
[36]  
COSTA PCG, 2006, FORM ONT INF SYST FO
[37]  
COUCLELIS H, 1992, LECT NOTES COMPUT SC, V639, P65
[38]  
COUCLELIS H, 2017, INT ENCY GEOGRAPHY, P1
[39]   Ontologies of geographic information [J].
Couclelis, Helen .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GEOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION SCIENCE, 2010, 24 (12) :1785-1809
[40]  
COX SJD, 2013, 6 INT WORKSH SEM SEN