Früher|Nächster

Hyperspectral anomaly detection via combining adaptive window saliency detection and improved superpixel segmentation

  • role： First author第一作者
  • Affiliation：

    College of Electric and Information Engineering, Zhengzhou University of Light Industry, Zhengzhou 450002, China

  • Email：qxl_sunshine@163.com
  • Introduction：钱晓亮，研究方向为模式识别与人工智能/遥感图像场景分类与目标检测。E-mail：qxl_sunshine@163.com
QIAN Xiaoliang1,  
  • Affiliation：

    College of Electric and Information Engineering, Zhengzhou University of Light Industry, Zhengzhou 450002, China

ZENG Yinfeng1,  
  • role： Corresponding author通信作者
  • Affiliation：

    School of Aerospace Science and Technology, Xidian University, Xi'an 710126, China

  • Email：ls1425854658@163.com
  • Introduction：林生，研究方向为高光谱图像异常检测/遥感图像目标检测。E-mail：ls1425854658@163.com
LIN Sheng2*,  
  • Affiliation：

    College of Information Science and Engineering, Henan University of Technology, Zhengzhou 450001, China

ZHANG Bo3,  
  • Affiliation：

    College of Electric and Information Engineering, Zhengzhou University of Light Industry, Zhengzhou 450002, China

REN Hangli1,  
  • Affiliation：

    College of Electric and Information Engineering, Zhengzhou University of Light Industry, Zhengzhou 450002, China

WANG Wei1

Resümee

Hyperspectral anomaly detection is used to identify pixels with significant spectral contrast to their surrounding pixels. It plays a valuable role in military and civilian fields due to the characteristic that the priori spectral information is not required. The existing local contrast-based methods usually adopt dual rectangular window scheme for hyperspectral anomaly detection. However, they empirically set the size of dual window, which limits their generalization capability.A hyperspectral anomaly detection method via combining adaptive window saliency detection and improved superpixel segmentation is proposed in this study to address the abovementioned issue. An adversarial autoencoder is first introduced to reduce the dimension of the hyperspectral image for decreasing the computation complexity of the proposed method. Second, the dimension-reduced hyperspectral image is segmented by improved superpixel segmentation. The existing spectral distance measurements used in the superpixel segmentation are effective when the relationship between the spectral value and the intensity of each pixel is linear. However, this condition cannot be guaranteed in practical applications. The improved superpixel segmentation adopts the orthogonal projection divergence to measure the spectral distance for solving the aforementioned problem. Thereafter, an adaptive window-based saliency detection algorithm is proposed and used to obtain the initial detection results. Specifically, the size of the inner window is adaptively determined by the superpixels, which ensures that the pixels belonging to the same inner window are homogeneous. The outer window can be obtained by enlarging the inner window with fixed size. Finally, the domain transform recursive filter and thresholding operation are employed to optimize the initial detection results for reducing the false alarm rate.The comparisons between the orthogonal projection divergence and three common spectral distance measurements (Euclidean distance, spectral angular mapping, and spectral information divergence) in terms of AUC show that the orthogonal projection divergence-based method achieves the highest score on all five datasets. The comparisons between the adaptive window and traditional manual setting dual window in terms of AUC show that the adaptive window-based method achieves the highest score on all five datasets. Comprehensive comparisons between the proposed method and seven state-of-the-art methods on five public datasets are implemented to validate the overall performance of the proposed method. Specifically, the subjective comparisons show that the anomalous pixels detected by the proposed method are more precise and have stronger contrast to background regions. The objective comparisons demonstrate that the proposed method obtains the highest overall detection accuracy and offers the best separability between the anomalous and background pixels.Three conclusions can be derived from this study. First, the improved superpixel segmentation algorithm can enhance the segmentation results, and the proposed adaptive window scheme can increase the performance of saliency detection. Second, the proposed method has excellent detection accuracy, false alarm rate, and separability between the anomalous and background pixels. Finally, the overall performance of the proposed method is superior to that of state-of-the-art methods.

Schlüsselwort

anomaly detection;hyperspectral image;orthogonal projection divergence;superpixel segmentation;adaptive window;saliency detection

References

  1. 1.
    Achanta R, Shaji A, Smith K, Lucchi A, Fua P and Süsstrunk S. 2012. SLIC superpixels compared to state-of-the-art superpixel methods. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 34(11): 2274-2282
  2. 2.
    Bacher R, Meillier C, Chatelain F and Michel O. 2017. Robust control of varying weak hyperspectral target detection with sparse nonnegative representation. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 65(13): 3538-3550
  3. 3.
    Bioucas-Dias J M, Plaza A, Camps-Valls G, Scheunders P, Nasrabadi N and Chanussot J. 2013. Hyperspectral remote sensing data analysis and future challenges. IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Magazine, 1(2): 6-36
  4. 4.
    Bradley A P. 1997. The use of the area under the ROC curve in the evaluation of machine learning algorithms. Pattern Recognition, 30(7): 1145-1159
  5. 5.
    Chen J H and Yang J. 2014. Robust subspace segmentation via low-rank representation. IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics, 44(8): 1432-1445
  6. 6.
    Chen Y, Nasrabadi N M and Tran T D. 2011. Simultaneous joint sparsity model for target detection in hyperspectral imagery. IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters, 8(4): 676-680
  7. 7.
    Du B and Zhang L P. 2011. Random-selection-based anomaly detector for hyperspectral imagery. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 49(5): 1578-1589
  8. 8.
    Du B, Zhao R, Zhang L P and Zhang L F. 2016. A spectral-spatial based local summation anomaly detection method for hyperspectral images. Signal Processing, 124: 115-131
  9. 9.
    Flach P, Hernández-Orallo J and Ferri C. 2011. A coherent interpretation of AUC as a measure of aggregated classification performance//Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on International Conference on Machine Learning. Bellevue: Omnipress: 657-664
  10. 10.
    Gastal E S L and Oliveira M M. 2011. Domain transform for edge-aware image and video processing. ACM Transactions on Graphics, 30(4): 69
  11. 11.
    Goferman S, Zelnik-Manor L and Tal A. 2012. Context-aware saliency detection. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 34(10): 1915-1926
  12. 12.
    Guo Q D, Zhang B, Ran Q, Gao L R, Li J and Plaza A. 2014. Weighted-RXD and linear filter-based RXD: improving background statistics estimation for anomaly detection in hyperspectral imagery. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing, 7(6): 2351-2366
  13. 13.
    Itti L, Koch C and Niebur E. 1998. A model of saliency-based visual attention for rapid scene analysis. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 20(11): 1254-1259
  14. 14.
    Jiang T, Li Y S, Xie W Y and Du Q. 2020. Discriminative reconstruction constrained generative adversarial network for hyperspectral anomaly detection. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 58(7): 4666-4679
  15. 15.
    Kang X D, Zhang X P, Li S T, Li K L, Li J and Benediktsson J A. 2017. Hyperspectral anomaly detection with attribute and edge-preserving filters. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 55(10): 5600-5611
  16. 16.
    Kwon H and Nasrabadi N M. 2005. Kernel RX-algorithm: a nonlinear anomaly detector for hyperspectral imagery. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 43(2): 388-397
  17. 17.
    Larochelle H, Erhan D, Courville A, Bergstra J and Bengio Y. 2007. An empirical evaluation of deep architectures on problems with many factors of variation//Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Machine Learning. Corvalis: Association for Computing Machinery: 473-480
  18. 18.
    Li J Y, Zhang H Y, Zhang L P and Ma L. 2015. Hyperspectral anomaly detection by the use of background joint sparse representation. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing, 8(6): 2523-2533
  19. 19.
    Li L, Li W, Du Q and Tao R. 2021. Low-rank and sparse decomposition with mixture of gaussian for hyperspectral anomaly detection. IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics, 51(9): 4363-4372
  20. 20.
    Li S T, Zhang K Z, Hao Q B, Duan P H and Kang X D. 2018. Hyperspectral anomaly detection with multiscale attribute and edge-preserving filters. IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters, 15(10): 1605-1609
  21. 21.
    Li W and Du Q. 2015. Collaborative representation for hyperspectral anomaly detection. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 53(3): 1463-1474
  22. 22.
    Liu Z X, Ma L and Du Q. 2021. Class-wise distribution adaptation for unsupervised classification of hyperspectral remote sensing images. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 59(1): 508-521
  23. 23.
    Manolakis D and Shaw G. 2002. Detection algorithms for hyperspectral imaging applications. IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, 19(1): 29-43
  24. 24.
    Molero J M, Garzon E M, Garcia I and Plaza A. 2013. Analysis and optimizations of global and local versions of the RX algorithm for anomaly detection in hyperspectral data. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing, 6(2): 801-814
  25. 25.
    Niu Y B and Wang B. 2016. Hyperspectral anomaly detection based on low-rank representation and learned dictionary. Remote Sensing, 8(4): 289
  26. 26.
    Otsu N. 1979. A threshold selection method from gray-level histograms. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 9(1): 62-66
  27. 27.
    Paris S, Mary D and Ferrari A. 2013. Detection tests using sparse models, with application to hyperspectral data. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 61(6): 1481-1494
  28. 28.
    Perona P and Malik J. 1990. Scale-space and edge detection using anisotropic diffusion. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 12(7): 629-639
  29. 29.
    Peyghambari S M and Zhang Y. 2021. Hyperspectral remote sensing in lithological mapping, mineral exploration, and environmental geology: an updated review. Journal of Applied Remote Sensing, 15(3): 031501
  30. 30.
    Qian X L, Li J, Cheng G, Yao X W, Zhao S N, Chen Y B and Jiang L Y. 2018. Evaluation of the effect of feature extraction strategy on the performance of high-resolution remote sensing image scene classification. Journal of Remote Sensing, 22(5): 758-776
  31. 31.
    Qian X L, Lin S, Cheng G, Yao X W, Ren H L and Wang W. 2020. Object detection in remote sensing images based on improved bounding box regression and multi-level features fusion. Remote Sensing, 12(1): 143
  32. 32.
    Reed I S and Yu X. 1990. Adaptive multiple-band cfar detection of an optical pattern with unknown spectral distribution. IEEE Transactions on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, 38(10): 1760-1770
  33. 33.
    Schaum A. 2004. Joint subspace detection of hyperspectral targets//Proceedings of the 2004 IEEE Aerospace Conference. Big Sky: IEEE: 1818-1824
  34. 34.
    Stein D W J, Beaven S G, Hoff L E, Winter E M, Schaum A P and Stocker A D. 2002. Anomaly detection from hyperspectral imagery. IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, 19(1): 58-69
  35. 35.
    Su H J, Du P J and Du Q. 2012. Semi-supervised dimensionality reduction using orthogonal projection divergence-based clustering for hyperspectral imagery. Optical Engineering, 51(11): 111715
  36. 36.
    Tan K, Li E Z, Du Q and Du P J. 2014. Hyperspectral image classification using band selection and morphological profiles. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing, 7(1): 40-48
  37. 37.
    Tomasi C and Manduchi R. 1998. Bilateral filtering for gray and color images//Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Computer Vision. Bombay: IEEE: 839-846
  38. 38.
    Tu B, Zhang X F, Kang X D, Zhang G Y and Li S T. 2019. Density peak-based noisy label detection for hyperspectral image classification. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 57(3): 1573-1584
  39. 39.
    Vanegas F, Bratanov D, Powell K, Weiss J and Gonzalez F. 2018. A novel methodology for improving plant pest surveillance in vineyards and crops using UAV-based hyperspectral and spatial data. Sensors, 18(1): 260
  40. 40.
    Williams J P, Bihl T J and Bauer K W. 2013. Towards the mitigation of correlation effects in anomaly detection for hyperspectral imagery. The Journal of Defense Modeling and Simulation: Applications, Methodology, Technology, 10(3): 263-273
  41. 41.
    Xie W Y, Lei J, Liu B Z, Li Y S and Jia X P. 2019. Spectral constraint adversarial autoencoders approach to feature representation in hyperspectral anomaly detection. Neural Networks, 119: 222-234
  42. 42.
    Xu Y, Wu Z B, Li J, Plaza A and Wei Z H. 2016. Anomaly detection in hyperspectral images based on low-rank and sparse representation. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 54(4): 1990-2000
  43. 43.
    Zhang Y X, Du B, Zhang L P and Wang S G. 2016. A low-rank and sparse matrix decomposition-based mahalanobis distance method for hyperspectral anomaly detection. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 54(3): 1376-1389

Lesen Sie die ganze Passage

The above content is generated by Large Model Translation. The translated content is for reference only. We do not assume any commercial or legal responsibilty for any consequences arising from the use of our website