Full text: Proceedings, XXth congress (Part 7)

bul 2004 
also lead 
mproved 
greatly 
ser must 
1 a small 
range of 
» process 
nd helps 
learning. 
3100.9. 
i. Higher 
ymmonly 
training 
en alpha 
, the user 
the alpha 
ntrolling 
> transfer 
id weight 
functions 
yperbolic 
5) will 
e will be 
function 
closed at 
ate to be 
yperbolic 
y. 
stopping 
monitors 
ing when 
the point 
| test the 
ained the 
> network 
d output. 
sd Cross 
hich is a 
ock of the 
aiwan on 
Quickbird 
ind roads 
e LIDAR 
; by using 
plying an 
the false 
Roads are 
e function 
re 72. 
abstracted 
1 program 
ite image. 
of inverse 
gradients. 
International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, Vol XXXV, Part B7. Istanbul 2004 
  
The criteria of location and direction are fulfilled by 
synergizing these results. 
3.2 Results 
The area size of the test area is in 1229x1209 pixels with pixel 
size of 2.44 m. A correlation analysis is carried out for the four 
factors, namely NDVI, slope, direction, and locations (Table 3). 
As indicated in Table 3, correlation coefficients are very low in 
general except V3 and V4 with a coefficient of 0.19. The 
highest value of correlation with the target V5 is colour tone V1 
with a value of 0.25; and then the slope V2. Principle 
component analysis is also applied to extract 4 components, and 
thus to reduce the correlation between factors. The relation 
between factors and the targets are also reduced accordingly. 
Therefore, the components are not adopted for the input of 
neural network. Subsequently, information obtained by visual 
interpretation as shown in Figure 4. is used to extract inputs of 
neural network by extracting 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, and 25% of 
data. Under 4-6-1 neural network structure, various subsets of 
random samples apply on 1000 training cycles. Learning errors 
for ANN training are shown in Table 4. The MSE (Mean Square 
Error) is higher than the threshold of 0.1 required by ANN. The 
correlation coefficient is 0.64, indicating that input datasets are 
not highly correlated with the targets. So many as 1000 training 
cycles are applied to observing learning error curve to see 
whether it is possible to reduce the MSE to as low as 0.1. As 
shown in Figure 5, after 100 training cycles the network 
becomes stable. Classification is further conducted using the 
trained network as shown in Table 5. A successful rate of 
classification is 85% for landslide and 73% for non-landslide. 
The omission and commission error are 0.27 and 0.15, 
respectively. The accuracy could be affected by following 
factors: 
a. The criteria for visual interpretation are not suitable for ANN 
in terms of the correlation between the factors and the target. 
Part of the reason may be attributed to the mismatch of the 
date of various information sources such as Quickbird images 
were taken on 15 Jan 2003; the LIDAR point clouds, in May 
2002; digital vectors, in August 2002; the landslides, in 1999. 
Evidence is given by that the NDVI of manually-interpretated 
landslide area was as high as 0.25, indicating the area is 
vegetated other than bare. 
b.Selected signatures are not good enough to represent the 
features as required. Criteria for manual interpretation such as 
the cut-off slopes and others are not implemented in this study. 
  
  
  
  
  
  
Correlation between Vectors of Values 
VI V2 V3 V4 V5 
V] 1.000 013 012 ‚009 230 
V2 013 1.000 -.044 011 087 
V3 012 -.044 1.000 161 -.010 
V4 .009 011 .161 1.000 .002 
V5 230 087 -.010 .002 1.000 
  
  
  
  
  
Table 3. Correlation between four signatures and target. 
  
(a) 5% samples (b) 10% samples 
  
  
  
  
  
  
MSE 0.46 MSE 0.44 
ERROR(%) 13.8 ERROR(%) 13.0 
r 0.62 r 0.64 
  
  
  
577 
  
(c) 15% samples (d) 20% samples 
  
  
  
  
  
MSE 0.39 MSE 0.41 
ERROR(%) 11.6 ERROR(%) 12.3 
r 0.68 r 0.67 
(e) 2596 samples (f) all samples 
MSE 0.38 MSE 0.51 
  
  
ERROR(%) 112 ERROR(%) 14.8 
r 0.70 r 0.55 
Table 4. Learning errors for ANN training 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
(a) 5% landslide | Non- | (b) 10% landslide | Non- 
landshde 84% 16% | landslide | 81% 19% 
Non- 28% 72% | Non- 23% 71% 
(c) 15% landslide | Non- (d) 20% | landslide | Non- 
landslide 85% 15% | landshde | 86% 14% 
Non- 21% 79% Non- 23% 77% 
(e) 25% landslide | Non- (f) all landslide | Non- 
landslide 86% 14% | landslide | 88% 12% 
Non- 22% 78% | Non- 45% 55% 
  
  
  
  
  
  
Table 5. Accuracy for ANN Training 
When the pixels with NDVI larger than 0.25 are filtered out for 
the area according to manually-interpretated landslides. Result 
shows that the correlation between colour tone and the target is 
raised to 0.47. With this condition, the MSE becomes accepted 
with a value smaller than 0.1 in a new ANN training cycle. And 
the correlation between the factor and the target becomes 0.75. 
However, the accuracy of non-landslide is not improved. 
4. CONCLUSIONS 
Some of the criteria for manual interpretation such as shape 
criterion and shadow criterion have not been implemented in 
this study due to inadequacy of information. This can be the 
reason that the final successful rate of identification of landslide 
is only 85%. Further research is required to improve both the 
spatial analysis algorithm and the data sources. Nevertheless, 
some findings are concluded in this study. 
l. It is feasible to gain a synergy of information on high 
resolution images, digital terrain models, existing roads and 
drainage systems and automate the information for landslide 
identification. 
2. The correlation analysis of the four criteria for manual 
interpretation shows that only direction and location criteria 
are correlated. And, only colour tone criterion is better 
correlated with the target. 
3. Under 4-6-1 ANN network structure, the MSE is 0.43 after 
training cycles, not acceptable to the threshold of 0.1. 
Furthermore, a correlation coefficient of 0.64 indicates that 
the neurons and the targets are not highly correlated. These 
could be due to the mismatch of the date of various data 
sources. 
4. Result of the classification shows a successful rate of 85% 
for landslide and 75% for non-landslide. The omission and 
commission error is 0.27 and 0.15, respectively © 
5. As shown in this study, GIS functions such as buffering, 
spatial intersection, overlay, and terrain analysis are 
employed. A system for landslide interpretation would 
require capabilities both from a GIS and an image analysis 
system. 
  
  
 
	        
Waiting...

Note to user

Dear user,

In response to current developments in the web technology used by the Goobi viewer, the software no longer supports your browser.

Please use one of the following browsers to display this page correctly.

Thank you.