Land-cover binary change detection methods for use in the moist tropical region of the Amazon: a comparative study

被引:112
作者
Lu, D
Mausel, P
Batistella, M
Moran, E
机构
[1] Indiana Univ, CIPEC, Bloomington, IN 47408 USA
[2] Indiana State Univ, Dept Geog Geol & Anthropol, Terre Haute, IN 47809 USA
[3] EMBRAPA Satellite Monitoring, Brazilian Agr Res Corp, Campinas, SP, Brazil
[4] Indiana Univ, Anthropol Ctr Training & Res Global Environm Chan, ACT, Bloomington, IN USA
基金
美国国家航空航天局; 美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
D O I
10.1080/01431160410001720748
中图分类号
TP7 [遥感技术];
学科分类号
081102 ; 0816 ; 081602 ; 083002 ; 1404 ;
摘要
Many land-cover change detection techniques have been developed; however, different conclusions about the value or appropriateness of each exist. This difference of opinion is often influenced by the landscape complexity of study areas and data used for analysis. Which method is most suitable for land-cover change detection in Amazon tropical regions remains unclear. In this paper, 10 binary change detection methods were implemented and compared with respect to their capability to detect land-cover change and no change conditions in moist tropical regions. They are image differencing (ID), modified image differencing (MID), a combination of image differencing and principal component analysis (IDPCA), principal component differencing (PCD), multitemporal PCA (MPCA), change vector analysis (CVA), vegetation index differencing (VID), image ratioing (IR), modified image ratioing (MIR), and a combination of image ratioing and PCA (IRPCA). Multi-temporal Thematic Mapper (TM) data were used to conduct land-cover binary change detection. Research results indicate that MID, PCD and ID using TM band 5 are significantly better than other binary change detection methods and they are recommended specifically for implementation in the Amazon basin.
引用
收藏
页码:101 / 114
页数:14
相关论文
共 36 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], INFORM PROCESSING RE
[2]  
Batistella M, 2001, CIPEC DISSERTATION S, V7
[3]  
CHAVEZ PS, 1994, PHOTOGRAMM ENG REM S, V60, P571
[4]  
Chavez PS, 1996, PHOTOGRAMM ENG REM S, V62, P1025
[5]  
COHEN WB, 1998, REMOTE SENSING CHANG, P89
[6]  
CONGALTON RG, 1983, PHOTOGRAMM ENG REM S, V49, P69
[7]   A REVIEW OF ASSESSING THE ACCURACY OF CLASSIFICATIONS OF REMOTELY SENSED DATA [J].
CONGALTON, RG .
REMOTE SENSING OF ENVIRONMENT, 1991, 37 (01) :35-46
[8]  
Coppin P. O. L. R., 1996, Remote Sensing Reviews, V13, P612, DOI [https://doi.org/10.1080/02757259609532305, DOI 10.1080/02757259609532305, 10.1080/02757259609532305]
[9]   The effects of image misregistration on the accuracy of remotely sensed change detection [J].
Dai, XL ;
Khorram, S .
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON GEOSCIENCE AND REMOTE SENSING, 1998, 36 (05) :1566-1577
[10]  
FUNG T, 1990, IEEE T GEOSCI REMOTE, V28, P681, DOI 10.1109/TGRS.1990.572980