Land-Use Land-Cover Classification by Machine Learning Classifiers for Satellite Observations-A Review

被引:699
作者
Talukdar, Swapan [1 ]
Singha, Pankaj [1 ]
Mahato, Susanta [1 ]
Shahfahad [2 ]
Pal, Swades [1 ]
Liou, Yuei-An [3 ]
Rahman, Atiqur [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Gour Banga, Dept Geog, NH12, Mokdumpur 732103, Malda, India
[2] Jamia Millia Islamia, Dept Geog, Fac Nat Sci, MMAJ Marg, New Delhi 110025, India
[3] Natl Cent Univ, Ctr Space & Remote Sensing Res, 300 Jhongda Rd, Taoyuan 32001, Taiwan
关键词
land use; land cover (LULC); Earth observations; machine learning algorithm; random forest; artificial neural network; SUPPORT VECTOR MACHINES; ECO-ENVIRONMENTAL VULNERABILITY; TREE SPECIES CLASSIFICATION; NEURAL-NETWORK CLASSIFIERS; RANDOM FOREST; RIVER-BASIN; ACCURACY; EROSION; IMAGERY; AREA;
D O I
10.3390/rs12071135
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Rapid and uncontrolled population growth along with economic and industrial development, especially in developing countries during the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries, have increased the rate of land-use/land-cover (LULC) change many times. Since quantitative assessment of changes in LULC is one of the most efficient means to understand and manage the land transformation, there is a need to examine the accuracy of different algorithms for LULC mapping in order to identify the best classifier for further applications of earth observations. In this article, six machine-learning algorithms, namely random forest (RF), support vector machine (SVM), artificial neural network (ANN), fuzzy adaptive resonance theory-supervised predictive mapping (Fuzzy ARTMAP), spectral angle mapper (SAM) and Mahalanobis distance (MD) were examined. Accuracy assessment was performed by using Kappa coefficient, receiver operational curve (RoC), index-based validation and root mean square error (RMSE). Results of Kappa coefficient show that all the classifiers have a similar accuracy level with minor variation, but the RF algorithm has the highest accuracy of 0.89 and the MD algorithm (parametric classifier) has the least accuracy of 0.82. In addition, the index-based LULC and visual cross-validation show that the RF algorithm (correlations between RF and normalised differentiation water index, normalised differentiation vegetation index and normalised differentiation built-up index are 0.96, 0.99 and 1, respectively, at 0.05 level of significance) has the highest accuracy level in comparison to the other classifiers adopted. Findings from the literature also proved that ANN and RF algorithms are the best LULC classifiers, although a non-parametric classifier like SAM (Kappa coefficient 0.84; area under curve (AUC) 0.85) has a better and consistent accuracy level than the other machine-learning algorithms. Finally, this review concludes that the RF algorithm is the best machine-learning LULC classifier, among the six examined algorithms although it is necessary to further test the RF algorithm in different morphoclimatic conditions in the future.
引用
收藏
页数:24
相关论文
共 111 条
[1]   Land cover and land use classification performance of machine learning algorithms in a boreal landscape using Sentinel-2 data [J].
Abdi, Abdulhakim Mohamed .
GISCIENCE & REMOTE SENSING, 2020, 57 (01) :1-20
[2]   Spatio-Temporal Patterns of Land Use/Land Cover Change in the Heterogeneous Coastal Region of Bangladesh between 1990 and 2017 [J].
Abdullah, Abu Yousuf Md ;
Masrur, Arif ;
Adnan, Mohammed Sarfaraz Gani ;
Al Baky, Md. Abdullah ;
Hassan, Quazi K. ;
Dewan, Ashraf .
REMOTE SENSING, 2019, 11 (07)
[3]   Estimating standing biomass in papyrus (Cyperus papyrus L.) swamp: exploratory of in situ hyperspectral indices and random forest regression [J].
Adam, Elhadi ;
Mutanga, Onisimo ;
Abdel-Rahman, Elfatih M. ;
Ismail, Riyad .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF REMOTE SENSING, 2014, 35 (02) :693-714
[4]   Fuzziness-based active learning framework to enhance hyperspectral image classification performance for discriminative and generative classifiers [J].
Ahmad, Muhammad ;
Protasov, Stanislav ;
Khan, Adil Mehmood ;
Hussain, Rasheed ;
Khattak, Asad Masood ;
Khan, Wajahat Ali .
PLOS ONE, 2018, 13 (01)
[5]   Zoning eco-environmental vulnerability for environmental management and protection [J].
Anh Kim Nguyen ;
Liou, Yuei-An ;
Li, Ming-Hsu ;
Tuan Anh Tran .
ECOLOGICAL INDICATORS, 2016, 69 :100-117
[6]  
[Anonymous], 2019, SN APPL SCI, DOI DOI 10.1007/s42452-019-0372-0
[7]  
[Anonymous], 2017, INT BHURBAN C APPL S
[8]  
[Anonymous], GISCI REMOTE SE 0823
[9]  
[Anonymous], 2016, REMOTE SENS BASEL, DOI DOI 10.3390/rs8060514