Band selection for hyperspectral imagery based on weighted probabilistic archetypal analysis

Weiwei SUN; Dianfa ZHANG; Gang YANG; Weiyue LI

doi:10.11834/jrs.20186446

Technology and Methodology | Views : 0 下载量: 487 CSCD: 8

PDF
Export
Share
Collection
Album

Band selection for hyperspectral imagery based on weighted probabilistic archetypal analysis
Vol. 22, Issue 1, Pages: 110-118(2018)
Received：11 November 2016，

Accepted：01 August 2017，

Published：2018-01
DOI： 10.11834/jrs.20186446
稿件说明：

移动端阅览

孙伟伟, 张殿发, 杨刚, 李巍岳. 2018. 加权概率原型分析的高光谱影像波段选择. 遥感学报, 22(1): 110–118 DOI： 10.11834/jrs.20186446.

Sun W W, Zhang D F, Yang G and Li W Y. 2018. Band selection for hyperspectral imagery based on weighted probabilistic archetypal analysis. Journal of Remote Sensing, 22(1): 110–118 DOI： 10.11834/jrs.20186446.

摘要

高光谱遥感影像波段众多、相关性强，导致其实际分类应用计算量大且存在明显的“维数灾难”问题。本文提出加权概率原型分析方法来研究高光谱影像的波段选择问题。该方法考虑波段间的差异性，引入综合差异性度量指标来构造权重矩阵以改进传统原型分析模型；考虑稀疏系数的狄利克雷分布和高光谱成像过程的量子特性，引入贝叶斯框架理论来构建波段选择的优化模型。加权概率原型分析方法采用迭代优化的策略，利用交替方向乘积方法来依次求解两个凸优化子问题来得到局部最优的稀疏系数矩阵并实现波段子集的最优估计。基于两个公开的高光谱数据集，对比4种主流的波段选择方法(SpaBS、SNMF、ISSC、SSR)来验证提出方法的可靠性。实验结果表明，加权概率原型分析方法的总体分类精度高于其他4种方法，能够得到更好的分类结果图。本文提出的加权概率原型分析模型能够选择合适的波段子集来满足高光谱影像的高精度分类需求。

Abstract

Hyperspectral imaging collects both spectral signals and images of ground objects on the Earth’s surface using hundreds of narrow bands. It has become a powerful technique for air-to-land observation. Unfortunately

numerous bands and strong intra-band correlations bring about information redundancy and heavy computational burdens for hyperspectral imagery (HSI) classification. Moreover

the “Hughes” problem traps the HSI data into a conflict between a high classification accuracy and an improbably large number of training samples. Therefore

proper bands should be selected from original hyperspectral data to reduce the high computations while achieving superior classification accuracies. In this study

a Weighted Probabilistic Archetypal Analysis (WPAA) method is proposed to extract proper bands from HSI data. WPAA considers the differences between pairwise bands and adopts a composite dissimilarity measure to construct a weighted matrix. This method improves the regular archetypal analysis by using the constructed weighted matrix in hyperspectral bands. Thereafter

the method considers the Dirichlet distribution of sparse coefficients and the quantum nature of hyperspectral imaging. It also introduces the Bayesian framework to construct its mathematical model for band selection. WPAA implements an iterative optimization scheme

transforms unconvex problems into two convex subproblems

and utilizes the Alternating Direction Method of Multipliers (ADMM) to estimate two sparse coefficient matrices. ADMM introduces proper auxiliary variables to augment the constraints in the objection function of WPAA

iteratively minimizes the Lagrangian function with respect to the primal variables

and maximizes it with respect to the Lagrange multipliers. The iteration procedure of two sparse coefficient matrices is repeated until the convergence conditions are satisfied or the number of iterations exceeds the predefined maximal number of iterations. The proper band subset is finally estimated using the sparse reconstruction equation. Two groups of classification experiments on the popular HSI datasets of PaviaU and Urban were designed to carefully test the performance of WPAA in band selection. Four state-of-the-art methods were compared against the proposed WPAA method

i.e.

the sparse-based band selection

sparse nonnegative matrix factorization

improved sparse subspace clustering

and sparse self-representation. Experimental results show that WPAA achieves better overall classification accuracy than the other four state-of-the-art methods. WPAA could also obtain the best classification map regardless of the different sizes of the band subset and different training samples. The proposed composite dissimilarity weighted matrix makes great contributions to the improvement of the classification accuracy of the PAA model. WPAA could help select the proper bands for hyperspectral images

and it can serve as a good alternative for dimensionality reduction in hyperspectral image classification.

关键词

Keywords

references

Bioucas-Dias J M, Plaza A, Dobigeon N, Parente M, Du Q, Gader P and Chanussot J. 2012. Hyperspectral unmixing overview: geometrical, statistical, and sparse regression-based approaches. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing, 5(2): 354–379

Chepushtanova S, Gittins C and Kirby M. 2014. Band selection in hyperspectral imagery using sparse support vector machines//Procedings of SPIE 9088, Algorithms and Technologies for Multispectral, Hyperspectral, and Ultraspectral Imagery XX, 90881F. Baltimore, Maryland, USA: SPIE: 90881F [DOI: 10.1117/12.2063812]

Cutler A and Breiman L. 1994. Archetypal analysis. Technometrics, 36(4): 338–347

Dobigeon N, Tourneret J Y, Richard C , Bermudez J C M, McLaughlin S and Hero A O. 2014. Nonlinear unmixing of hyperspectral images: models and algorithms. IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, 31(1): 82–94

Donoho D L. 2006. Compressed sensing. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 52(4): 1289–1306

Du B, Wang S D, Wang N, Zhang L F, Tao D C and Zhang L F. 2016. Hyperspectral signal unmixing based on constrained non-negative matrix factorization approach. Neurocomputing, 204: 153–161

Du P J, Xue Z H, Li J and Plaza A. 2015. Learning discriminative sparse representations for hyperspectral image classification. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing, 9(6): 1089–1104

杜培军, 夏俊士, 薛朝辉, 谭琨, 苏红军, 鲍蕊. 2016. 高光谱遥感影像分类研究进展. 遥感学报, 20(2): 236–256

Du P J, Xia J S, Xue Z H, Tan K, Su H J and Bao R. 2016. Review of hyperspectral remote sensing image classification. Journal of Remote Sensing, 20(2): 236–256 (

Elhamifar E, Sapiro G and Vidal R. 2012. See all by looking at a few: sparse modeling for finding representative objects//Proceedings of 2012 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. Providence, RI, USA: IEEE: 1600–1607 [DOI: 10.1109/CVPR.2012.6247852]

He W, Zhang H Y, Zhang L P and Shen H F. 2016. Total-variation-regularized low-rank matrix factorization for hyperspectral image restoration. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 54(1): 178–188

Li J M and Qian Y T. 2011. Clustering-based hyperspectral band selection using sparse nonnegative matrix factorization. Journal of Zhejiang University SCIENCE C, 12(7): 542–549

Li S J and Qi H R. 2011. Sparse representation based band selection for hyperspectral images//Proceedings of the 18th IEEE International Conference on Image Processing. Brussels, Belgium: IEEE: 2693–2696 [DOI: 10.1109/ICIP.2011.6116223]

Mørup M and Hansen L K. 2012. Archetypal analysis for machine learning and data mining. Neurocomputing, 80: 54–63

Pal M and Foody G M. 2010. Feature selection for classification of hyperspectral data by SVM. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 48(5): 2297–2307

Patil S, Velmurugan R and Rajwade A. 2016. Dictionary learning for poisson compressed sensing//Proceedings of 2016 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing. Shanghai, China: IEEE: 4648–4652 [DOI: 10.1109/ICASSP.2016.7472558]

施蓓琦, 刘春, 孙伟伟, 陈能. 2013. 应用稀疏非负矩阵分解聚类实现高光谱影像波段的优化选择. 测绘学报, 42(3): 351–358

Shi B Q, Liu C, Sun W W, Chen N. 2013. Sparse nonnegative matrix factorization for hyperspectral optimal band selection. Acta Geodaetica et Cartographica Sinica, 42(3): 351–358 (

Sun W W, Zhang L P, Du B, Li W Y and Lai Y M. 2015a. Band selection using improved sparse subspace clustering for hyperspectral imagery classification. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing, 8(6): 2784–2797

Sun W W, Li W Y, Li J L and Lai Y M. 2015b. Band selection using sparse nonnegative matrix factorization with the thresholded earth’s mover distance for hyperspectral imagery classification. Earth Science Informatics, 8(4): 907–918

Sun W W, Zhang L P, Zhang L F and Lai Y M. 2016a. A dissimilarity-weighted sparse self-representation method for band selection in hyperspectral imagery classification. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing, 9(9): 4374–4388

Sun W W, Jiang M, Li W Y and Liu Y N. 2016b. A symmetric sparse representation based band selection method for hyperspectral imagery classification. Remote Sensing, 8(3): 238

童庆禧, 张兵, 张立福. 2016. 中国高光谱遥感的前沿进展. 遥感学报, 20(5): 689–707

Tong Q X, Zhang B and Zhang L F. 2016. Current progress of hyperspectral remote sensing in China. Journal of Remote Sensing, 20(5): 689–707 (

张良培, 李家艺. 2016. 高光谱图像稀疏信息处理综述与展望. 遥感学报, 20(5): 1091–1101

Zhang L P and Li J Y. 2016. Development and prospect of sparse representation-based hyperspectral image processing and analysis. Journal of Remote Sensing, 20(5): 1091–1101 (

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

Alert me when the article has been cited

提交

Integration of a spatial-spectral structure with improved local density for hyperspectral image band selection

Multifeature deep subspace clustering for hyperspectral band selection

Noise robust band selection method for hyperspectral images

Robust multi-feature spectral clustering for hyperspectral band selection

Band selection-based collaborative representation for anomaly detection in hyperspectral images