Inviting an author to review:
Find an author and click ‘Invite to review selected article’ near their name.
Search for authorsSearch for similar articles
35
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

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

      , , , , , ,
      Remote Sensing
      MDPI AG

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          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.

          Related collections

          Most cited references107

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Random forest classifier for remote sensing classification

          M. Pal (2005)
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Support vector machines in remote sensing: A review

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              A survey of image classification methods and techniques for improving classification performance

              D Lu, Q. Weng (2007)
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                Remote Sensing
                Remote Sensing
                MDPI AG
                2072-4292
                April 2020
                April 02 2020
                : 12
                : 7
                : 1135
                Article
                10.3390/rs12071135
                12905734-b632-44e9-a3aa-787cac5ea1b1
                © 2020

                https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

                History

                Quantitative & Systems biology,Biophysics
                Quantitative & Systems biology, Biophysics

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content332

                Cited by129

                Most referenced authors893