You have requested a machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Neither SPIE nor the owners and publishers of the content make, and they explicitly disclaim, any express or implied representations or warranties of any kind, including, without limitation, representations and warranties as to the functionality of the translation feature or the accuracy or completeness of the translations.
Translations are not retained in our system. Your use of this feature and the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in the Terms and Conditions of Use of the SPIE website.
13 June 2014Hyperspectral band selection based on the aggregation of proximity measures for automated target detection
Band selection is an important unsolved challenge in hyperspectral image processing that has been used for
dimensionality reduction and classification improvement. To date, numerous researchers have investigated the
unsupervised selection of band groups using measures such as correlation and Kullback-Leibler divergence. However,
no clear winner has emerged across data sets and detection tasks. Herein, we investigate the utility of aggregating
different proximity measures for band group selection. Specifically, we employ the Choquet integral with respect to different measures (capacities) as it is able to yield a variety of aggregation functions like t-norms, t-conorms and
averaging operators. We explore the utility of aggregation in the context of single band, single band group, band group
dimensionality reduction and multiple band group combinations in conjunction with support vector machine (SVM)
based classification. Our preliminary experiments indicate there is value in aggregating different proximity measures. In some instances an intersection operator works well while in other cases a union operator is best. As may be expected,
this can, and does vary per detection task. We also see that depending on the difficulty of the target detection problem, different aggregation, band grouping and combination strategies prevail. Advantages of our approach include; flexibility,
the aggregation operator can be learned, and the method can default to a single proximity measure if needed and result, in the worst case, in no performance loss. Experiments are performed on three hyperspectral benchmark data sets to demonstrate the applicability of the proposed concepts.
John E. Ball,Derek T. Anderson, andSathish Samiappan
"Hyperspectral band selection based on the aggregation of proximity measures for automated target detection", Proc. SPIE 9088, Algorithms and Technologies for Multispectral, Hyperspectral, and Ultraspectral Imagery XX, 908814 (13 June 2014); https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2050638
The alert did not successfully save. Please try again later.
John E. Ball, Derek T. Anderson, Sathish Samiappan, "Hyperspectral band selection based on the aggregation of proximity measures for automated target detection," Proc. SPIE 9088, Algorithms and Technologies for Multispectral, Hyperspectral, and Ultraspectral Imagery XX, 908814 (13 June 2014); https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2050638