IGARSS__RTC.pdf
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

IGARSS__RTC.pdf

on

  • 398 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
398
Views on SlideShare
398
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    IGARSS__RTC.pdf IGARSS__RTC.pdf Presentation Transcript

    • USE OF RADIOMETRIC TERRAINCORRECTION TO IMPROVEPOLSAR LAND COVER CLASSIFICATION Don Atwood1 and David Small2 1) University of Alaska Fairbanks 2) University of Zurich, Switzerland IGARSS July 2011 Don Atwood & David Small 1
    • Presentation Overview• Introduce Boreal Land Cover Classification project • Focus on species differentiation in boreal environment • Introduce reference data for land cover classification• Introduce method of Radiometric Terrain Correction (RTC) • Terrain-flattened Gamma Naught Backscatter• Perform RTC on polarimetric parameters to address topography • Demonstrate synergy of PolSARpro and MapReady Tools• Compare results for RTC-corrected and non-corrected classification• Characterize optimal classification approach for Interior Alaska IGARSS July 2011 Don Atwood & David Small 2
    • Study Region Boreal environment of Interior Alaska Characterized by: • rivers • wetlands • herbaceous tundra • black spruce forests (north facing) • birch forests (south facing) • low intensity urban areasIGARSS July 2011 Don Atwood & David Small 3
    • Land Cover Reference IGARSS July 2011 Don Atwood & David Small 4
    • Study Data Quad-Pol data selected: • ALOS L-band PALSAR • 21.5 degree look angle • Of April, May, July, and Nov dates, July 12 2009 selected • Post-thaw • Leaf-on • Coverage includes Fairbanks and regional roadsPauli Image IGARSS July 2011 Don Atwood & David Small 5
    • Problem of TopographySpan (Trace of T3 Matrix) Wishart Segmentation IGARSS July 2011 Don Atwood & David Small 6
    • Backscatter Reference Areas Sensor Aβ & β0 Aγ & γ0 Nadir Near Aσ & σ0Standard areas for Ellipsoid Normalization Far IGARSS July 2011 Don Atwood & David Small 7
    • Backscatter Reference AreasRelationships between cross sections for ellipsoidal surfaces IGARSS July 2011 Don Atwood & David Small 8
    • Terrain-flatteningThe concept of a single Local Incident Angle determining the terrain’s local normalization area is flawed: • adapted from ellipsoidal incident angle for ocean, sea-ice, & flatlands • fails to account for foreshortening and the radiometric impact of topography.To improve sensor model: ➡use local contributing area, not angle!Ref.: Small, D., Flattening Gamma: Radiometric Terrain Correction for SAR Imagery,IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 13p (in press). IGARSS July 2011 Don Atwood & David Small 9
    • Terrain-flattening Solution: Use simulated image to Normalize β0 XExample over SwitzerlandASAR WS data courtesy ESA IGARSS July 2011 Don Atwood & David Small 10
    • Terrain-flattening Convention 1 2 3 4 5Earth Model None Ellipsoid TerrainReference AreaArea DerivationNormalisationProduct GTC NORLIM RTC IGARSS July 2011 Don Atwood & David Small 11
    • Terrain Correction in Coastal BC VancouverGTC (Sept 2008) Integrated contributing areaENVISAT ASAR WSM data courtesy ESA (based on SRTM3) IGARSS July 2011 Don Atwood & David Small 12
    • Terrain Correction in Coastal BCGTC (Sept 2008) Integrated contributing areaENVISAT ASAR WSM data courtesy ESA (based on SRTM3) IGARSS July 2011 Don Atwood & David Small 13
    • Coastal BC: GTCASAR WSM GTC IGARSS July 2011 Don Atwood & David Small 14
    • Coastal BC: RTCASAR WSM RTC IGARSS July 2011 Don Atwood & David Small 15
    • Coastal BC: NORLIMASAR WSM NORLIM IGARSS July 2011 Don Atwood & David Small 16
    • Coherency Matrix Scattering Matrix  S XX S XY  S =  S  YX SYX   S XX + SYY 2 (S XX + SYY )(S XX − SYY )* * 2 (S XX + SYY )S * XY   T3 = 1  (S − S )(S + S )* S XX − SYY 2 2 (S XX − SYY )S * XY  2  XX YY XX YY   2 S (S + S )* 2 S XY (S XX − SYY ) * 4 S XY 2   XY XX YY  T11: “Single Bounce” T22 : “Double Bounce” T33 : “Volume Scattering” IGARSS July 2011 Don Atwood & David Small 17
    • Radiometric Terrain Correction of Coherency Matrix• Radiometric Terrain Correction: Coherency Matrix terrain corrected T11 T12 T13  Coherency Matrix T3 = T21 T22 T23  T11 T12 T13  T3 = T21 T22 T23  Area Normalization     T31 T32 T33    T31 T32 T33    • Scale all matrix elements by Area Normalization • Acknowledge that angular dependence of scattering mechanisms is not addressed IGARSS July 2011 Don Atwood & David Small 18
    • Radiometric Terrain Correction of Coherency MatrixGTC: No Normalization RTC: Terrain-model Normalization IGARSS July 2011 Don Atwood & David Small 19
    • Radiometric Terrain Correction of Coherency MatrixGTC: No Normalization RTC: Terrain-model Normalization IGARSS July 2011 Don Atwood & David Small 20
    • Integration of PolSARpro and MapReadyIngest PALSAR data Terrain-correct Perform Wishart Export to GISGenerate T3 decomposition Cluster-bustingRTC using area image provided by UZHLee Sigma Speckle FilterPOC IGARSS July 2011 Don Atwood & David Small 21
    • Radiometric Terrain Correction of Coherency MatrixWishart - No Normalization Radiometric Terrain Correction IGARSS July 2011 Don Atwood & David Small 22
    • Radiometric Terrain Correction of Coherency MatrixUSGS Reference Radiometric Terrain Correction IGARSS July 2011 Don Atwood & David Small 23
    • Classification ResultsUrban areas missed / Identified as Open Water IGARSS July 2011 Don Atwood & David Small 24
    • Classification ResultsInability to distinguish Mixed Forests and Shrub / Scrub IGARSS July 2011 Don Atwood & David Small 25
    • Classification ResultsNo Normalization USGS Reference RTC IGARSS July 2011 Don Atwood & David Small 26
    • Accuracy Assessment No Normalization Open Developed Barren Deciduous Evergreen Mixed Shrub/ Woody Herbaceous User No Normalization Water Land Land Forest Forest Forest Scrub Wetlands Wetlands Accuracy Open Water 42402 22539 15229 2168 1512 99 1024 6299 498 46% Developed Land 836 27431 1304 3130 903 458 123 2663 64 74% Barren Land 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA Deciduous Forest 11217 50614 1795 390417 228454 112888 12687 52712 528 45% Evergreen Forest 13734 69849 6849 162366 323079 49803 12643 94157 617 44% Mixed Forest 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA Shrub/ Scrub 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA Woody Wetlands 7062 15611 4924 56052 135667 12103 30585 480635 11594 65%Herbaceous Wetlands 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA Producer Accuracy 56% 15% 0% 64% 47% 0% 0% 76% 0% 51% IGARSS July 2011 Don Atwood & David Small 27
    • Accuracy Assessment With RTC Open Developed Barren Deciduous Evergreen Mixed Shrub/ Woody Herbaceous User Normalized T3 Water Land Land Forest Forest Forest Scrub Wetlands Wetlands Accuracy Open Water 45570 33695 17297 3595 2188 165 1616 9905 739 40% Developed Land 942 27464 1320 4717 1547 608 148 1878 27 71% Barren Land 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA Deciduous Forest 10161 59438 1461 482548 234568 128097 10344 30375 147 50% Evergreen Forest 10614 50149 4409 53025 335583 30621 13520 138224 527 53% Mixed Forest 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA Shrub/ Scrub 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA Woody Wetlands 7964 15298 5614 70248 115729 15860 31434 456084 11861 64%Herbaceous Wetlands 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA Producer Accuracy 61% 15% 0% 79% 49% 0% 0% 72% 0% 54% IGARSS July 2011 Don Atwood & David Small 28
    • Accuracy Assessment Comparison Producer Class RTC No RTC Improvement Open Water 61% 56% 5% Developed Land 15% 15% 0% Deciduous Forest 79% 64% 15% Evergreen Forest 49% 47% 2% Woody Wetlands 72% 76% -4%• RTC yields improved accuracy (particularly for Deciduous Forest)• But statistics may not tell the whole story: the USGS reference has a stated accuracy of approximately 75%! IGARSS July 2011 Don Atwood & David Small 29
    • Impact of RTC on forest classificationNo Normalization USGS Reference RTC IGARSS July 2011 Don Atwood & David Small 30
    • Conclusions• In general, PolSAR classification is difficult! • Data fusion provides greatest hope for accurate classification results• Radiometric variability caused by topography dominates PolSAR classification• Area-based RTC offers effective way to “flatten” SAR radiometry• RTC of Coherency Matrix shown to improve classification accuracy: • Impact most pronounced for Deciduous Forests• Although not complete, RTC approach is simple and effective • Different scattering mechanisms (SB, DB, Volume) have different sensitivities to topography. RTC does not address this • However, RTC is very effective first order correction for segmenting polarimetric data by phenology rather than topography IGARSS July 2011 Don Atwood & David Small 31
    • Discussion Don Atwood dkatwood@alaska.edu (907) 474-7380 32 IGARSS July 2011 Don Atwood & David SmallPhoto Credit: Don Atwood