skip to main content


Title: A Multiscale Deep Learning Approach for High-Resolution Hyperspectral Image Classification
Hyperspectral imagery (HSI) has emerged as a highly successful sensing modality for a variety of applications ranging from urban mapping to environmental monitoring and precision agriculture. Despite the efforts by the scientific community, developing reliable algorithms of HSI classification remains a challenging problem especially for high-resolution HSI data where there is often larger intraclass variability combined with scarcity of ground truth data and class imbalance. In recent years, deep neural networks have emerged as a promising strategy for problems of HSI classification where they have shown a remarkable potential for learning joint spectral-spatial features efficiently via backpropagation. In this paper, we propose a deep learning strategy for HSI classification that combines different convolutional neural networks especially designed to efficiently learn joint spatial-spectral features over multiple scales. Our method achieves an overall classification accuracy of 66.73% on the 2018 IEEE GRSS hyperspectral dataset – a high-resolution dataset that includes 20 urban land-cover and land-use classes  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1720452
NSF-PAR ID:
10181385
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ;
Date Published:
Journal Name:
IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters
ISSN:
1545-598X
Page Range / eLocation ID:
1 to 5
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. Agaian, Sos S. ; Jassim, Sabah A. ; DelMarco, Stephen P. ; Asari, Vijayan K. (Ed.)
    Neural networks have emerged to be the most appropriate method for tackling the classification problem for hyperspectral images (HIS). Convolutional neural networks (CNNs), being the current state-of-art for various classification tasks, have some limitations in the context of HSI. These CNN models are very susceptible to overfitting because of 1) lack of availability of training samples, 2) large number of parameters to fine-tune. Furthermore, the learning rates used by CNN must be small to avoid vanishing gradients, and thus the gradient descent takes small steps to converge and slows down the model runtime. To overcome these drawbacks, a novel quaternion based hyperspectral image classification network (QHIC Net) is proposed in this paper. The QHIC Net can model both the local dependencies between the spectral channels of a single-pixel and the global structural relationship describing the edges or shapes formed by a group of pixels, making it suitable for HSI datasets that are small and diverse. Experimental results on three HSI datasets demonstrate that the QHIC Net performs on par with the traditional CNN based methods for HSI Classification with a far fewer number of parameters. Keywords: Classification, deep learning, hyperspectral imaging, spectral-spatial feature learning 
    more » « less
  2. Airborne remote sensing offers unprecedented opportunities to efficiently monitor vegetation, but methods to delineate and classify individual plant species using the collected data are still actively being developed and improved. The Integrating Data science with Trees and Remote Sensing (IDTReeS) plant identification competition openly invited scientists to create and compare individual tree mapping methods. Participants were tasked with training taxon identification algorithms based on two sites, to then transfer their methods to a third unseen site, using field-based plant observations in combination with airborne remote sensing image data products from the National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON). These data were captured by a high resolution digital camera sensitive to red, green, blue (RGB) light, hyperspectral imaging spectrometer spanning the visible to shortwave infrared wavelengths, and lidar systems to capture the spectral and structural properties of vegetation. As participants in the IDTReeS competition, we developed a two-stage deep learning approach to integrate NEON remote sensing data from all three sensors and classify individual plant species and genera. The first stage was a convolutional neural network that generates taxon probabilities from RGB images, and the second stage was a fusion neural network that “learns” how to combine these probabilities with hyperspectral and lidar data. Our two-stage approach leverages the ability of neural networks to flexibly and automatically extract descriptive features from complex image data with high dimensionality. Our method achieved an overall classification accuracy of 0.51 based on the training set, and 0.32 based on the test set which contained data from an unseen site with unknown taxa classes. Although transferability of classification algorithms to unseen sites with unknown species and genus classes proved to be a challenging task, developing methods with openly available NEON data that will be collected in a standardized format for 30 years allows for continual improvements and major gains for members of the computational ecology community. We outline promising directions related to data preparation and processing techniques for further investigation, and provide our code to contribute to open reproducible science efforts. 
    more » « less
  3. Messinger, David W. ; Velez-Reyes, Miguel (Ed.)
    Recently, multispectral and hyperspectral data fusion models based on deep learning have been proposed to generate images with a high spatial and spectral resolution. The general objective is to obtain images that improve spatial resolution while preserving high spectral content. In this work, two deep learning data fusion techniques are characterized in terms of classification accuracy. These methods fuse a high spatial resolution multispectral image with a lower spatial resolution hyperspectral image to generate a high spatial-spectral hyperspectral image. The first model is based on a multi-scale long short-term memory (LSTM) network. The LSTM approach performs the fusion using a multiple step process that transitions from low to high spatial resolution using an intermediate step capable of reducing spatial information loss while preserving spectral content. The second fusion model is based on a convolutional neural network (CNN) data fusion approach. We present fused images using four multi-source datasets with different spatial and spectral resolutions. Both models provide fused images with increased spatial resolution from 8m to 1m. The obtained fused images using the two models are evaluated in terms of classification accuracy on several classifiers: Minimum Distance, Support Vector Machines, Class-Dependent Sparse Representation and CNN classification. The classification results show better performance in both overall and average accuracy for the images generated with the multi-scale LSTM fusion over the CNN fusion 
    more » « less
  4. null (Ed.)
    Urban flooding is a major natural disaster that poses a serious threat to the urban environment. It is highly demanded that the flood extent can be mapped in near real-time for disaster rescue and relief missions, reconstruction efforts, and financial loss evaluation. Many efforts have been taken to identify the flooding zones with remote sensing data and image processing techniques. Unfortunately, the near real-time production of accurate flood maps over impacted urban areas has not been well investigated due to three major issues. (1) Satellite imagery with high spatial resolution over urban areas usually has nonhomogeneous background due to different types of objects such as buildings, moving vehicles, and road networks. As such, classical machine learning approaches hardly can model the spatial relationship between sample pixels in the flooding area. (2) Handcrafted features associated with the data are usually required as input for conventional flood mapping models, which may not be able to fully utilize the underlying patterns of a large number of available data. (3) High-resolution optical imagery often has varied pixel digital numbers (DNs) for the same ground objects as a result of highly inconsistent illumination conditions during a flood. Accordingly, traditional methods of flood mapping have major limitations in generalization based on testing data. To address the aforementioned issues in urban flood mapping, we developed a patch similarity convolutional neural network (PSNet) using satellite multispectral surface reflectance imagery before and after flooding with a spatial resolution of 3 meters. We used spectral reflectance instead of raw pixel DNs so that the influence of inconsistent illumination caused by varied weather conditions at the time of data collection can be greatly reduced. Such consistent spectral reflectance data also enhance the generalization capability of the proposed model. Experiments on the high resolution imagery before and after the urban flooding events (i.e., the 2017 Hurricane Harvey and the 2018 Hurricane Florence) showed that the developed PSNet can produce urban flood maps with consistently high precision, recall, F1 score, and overall accuracy compared with baseline classification models including support vector machine, decision tree, random forest, and AdaBoost, which were often poor in either precision or recall. The study paves the way to fuse bi-temporal remote sensing images for near real-time precision damage mapping associated with other types of natural hazards (e.g., wildfires and earthquakes). 
    more » « less
  5. Obeid, Iyad Selesnick (Ed.)
    Electroencephalography (EEG) is a popular clinical monitoring tool used for diagnosing brain-related disorders such as epilepsy [1]. As monitoring EEGs in a critical-care setting is an expensive and tedious task, there is a great interest in developing real-time EEG monitoring tools to improve patient care quality and efficiency [2]. However, clinicians require automatic seizure detection tools that provide decisions with at least 75% sensitivity and less than 1 false alarm (FA) per 24 hours [3]. Some commercial tools recently claim to reach such performance levels, including the Olympic Brainz Monitor [4] and Persyst 14 [5]. In this abstract, we describe our efforts to transform a high-performance offline seizure detection system [3] into a low latency real-time or online seizure detection system. An overview of the system is shown in Figure 1. The main difference between an online versus offline system is that an online system should always be causal and has minimum latency which is often defined by domain experts. The offline system, shown in Figure 2, uses two phases of deep learning models with postprocessing [3]. The channel-based long short term memory (LSTM) model (Phase 1 or P1) processes linear frequency cepstral coefficients (LFCC) [6] features from each EEG channel separately. We use the hypotheses generated by the P1 model and create additional features that carry information about the detected events and their confidence. The P2 model uses these additional features and the LFCC features to learn the temporal and spatial aspects of the EEG signals using a hybrid convolutional neural network (CNN) and LSTM model. Finally, Phase 3 aggregates the results from both P1 and P2 before applying a final postprocessing step. The online system implements Phase 1 by taking advantage of the Linux piping mechanism, multithreading techniques, and multi-core processors. To convert Phase 1 into an online system, we divide the system into five major modules: signal preprocessor, feature extractor, event decoder, postprocessor, and visualizer. The system reads 0.1-second frames from each EEG channel and sends them to the feature extractor and the visualizer. The feature extractor generates LFCC features in real time from the streaming EEG signal. Next, the system computes seizure and background probabilities using a channel-based LSTM model and applies a postprocessor to aggregate the detected events across channels. The system then displays the EEG signal and the decisions simultaneously using a visualization module. The online system uses C++, Python, TensorFlow, and PyQtGraph in its implementation. The online system accepts streamed EEG data sampled at 250 Hz as input. The system begins processing the EEG signal by applying a TCP montage [8]. Depending on the type of the montage, the EEG signal can have either 22 or 20 channels. To enable the online operation, we send 0.1-second (25 samples) length frames from each channel of the streamed EEG signal to the feature extractor and the visualizer. Feature extraction is performed sequentially on each channel. The signal preprocessor writes the sample frames into two streams to facilitate these modules. In the first stream, the feature extractor receives the signals using stdin. In parallel, as a second stream, the visualizer shares a user-defined file with the signal preprocessor. This user-defined file holds raw signal information as a buffer for the visualizer. The signal preprocessor writes into the file while the visualizer reads from it. Reading and writing into the same file poses a challenge. The visualizer can start reading while the signal preprocessor is writing into it. To resolve this issue, we utilize a file locking mechanism in the signal preprocessor and visualizer. Each of the processes temporarily locks the file, performs its operation, releases the lock, and tries to obtain the lock after a waiting period. The file locking mechanism ensures that only one process can access the file by prohibiting other processes from reading or writing while one process is modifying the file [9]. The feature extractor uses circular buffers to save 0.3 seconds or 75 samples from each channel for extracting 0.2-second or 50-sample long center-aligned windows. The module generates 8 absolute LFCC features where the zeroth cepstral coefficient is replaced by a temporal domain energy term. For extracting the rest of the features, three pipelines are used. The differential energy feature is calculated in a 0.9-second absolute feature window with a frame size of 0.1 seconds. The difference between the maximum and minimum temporal energy terms is calculated in this range. Then, the first derivative or the delta features are calculated using another 0.9-second window. Finally, the second derivative or delta-delta features are calculated using a 0.3-second window [6]. The differential energy for the delta-delta features is not included. In total, we extract 26 features from the raw sample windows which add 1.1 seconds of delay to the system. We used the Temple University Hospital Seizure Database (TUSZ) v1.2.1 for developing the online system [10]. The statistics for this dataset are shown in Table 1. A channel-based LSTM model was trained using the features derived from the train set using the online feature extractor module. A window-based normalization technique was applied to those features. In the offline model, we scale features by normalizing using the maximum absolute value of a channel [11] before applying a sliding window approach. Since the online system has access to a limited amount of data, we normalize based on the observed window. The model uses the feature vectors with a frame size of 1 second and a window size of 7 seconds. We evaluated the model using the offline P1 postprocessor to determine the efficacy of the delayed features and the window-based normalization technique. As shown by the results of experiments 1 and 4 in Table 2, these changes give us a comparable performance to the offline model. The online event decoder module utilizes this trained model for computing probabilities for the seizure and background classes. These posteriors are then postprocessed to remove spurious detections. The online postprocessor receives and saves 8 seconds of class posteriors in a buffer for further processing. It applies multiple heuristic filters (e.g., probability threshold) to make an overall decision by combining events across the channels. These filters evaluate the average confidence, the duration of a seizure, and the channels where the seizures were observed. The postprocessor delivers the label and confidence to the visualizer. The visualizer starts to display the signal as soon as it gets access to the signal file, as shown in Figure 1 using the “Signal File” and “Visualizer” blocks. Once the visualizer receives the label and confidence for the latest epoch from the postprocessor, it overlays the decision and color codes that epoch. The visualizer uses red for seizure with the label SEIZ and green for the background class with the label BCKG. Once the streaming finishes, the system saves three files: a signal file in which the sample frames are saved in the order they were streamed, a time segmented event (TSE) file with the overall decisions and confidences, and a hypotheses (HYP) file that saves the label and confidence for each epoch. The user can plot the signal and decisions using the signal and HYP files with only the visualizer by enabling appropriate options. For comparing the performance of different stages of development, we used the test set of TUSZ v1.2.1 database. It contains 1015 EEG records of varying duration. The any-overlap performance [12] of the overall system shown in Figure 2 is 40.29% sensitivity with 5.77 FAs per 24 hours. For comparison, the previous state-of-the-art model developed on this database performed at 30.71% sensitivity with 6.77 FAs per 24 hours [3]. The individual performances of the deep learning phases are as follows: Phase 1’s (P1) performance is 39.46% sensitivity and 11.62 FAs per 24 hours, and Phase 2 detects seizures with 41.16% sensitivity and 11.69 FAs per 24 hours. We trained an LSTM model with the delayed features and the window-based normalization technique for developing the online system. Using the offline decoder and postprocessor, the model performed at 36.23% sensitivity with 9.52 FAs per 24 hours. The trained model was then evaluated with the online modules. The current performance of the overall online system is 45.80% sensitivity with 28.14 FAs per 24 hours. Table 2 summarizes the performances of these systems. The performance of the online system deviates from the offline P1 model because the online postprocessor fails to combine the events as the seizure probability fluctuates during an event. The modules in the online system add a total of 11.1 seconds of delay for processing each second of the data, as shown in Figure 3. In practice, we also count the time for loading the model and starting the visualizer block. When we consider these facts, the system consumes 15 seconds to display the first hypothesis. The system detects seizure onsets with an average latency of 15 seconds. Implementing an automatic seizure detection model in real time is not trivial. We used a variety of techniques such as the file locking mechanism, multithreading, circular buffers, real-time event decoding, and signal-decision plotting to realize the system. A video demonstrating the system is available at: https://www.isip.piconepress.com/projects/nsf_pfi_tt/resources/videos/realtime_eeg_analysis/v2.5.1/video_2.5.1.mp4. The final conference submission will include a more detailed analysis of the online performance of each module. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Research reported in this publication was most recently supported by the National Science Foundation Partnership for Innovation award number IIP-1827565 and the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Universal Research Enhancement Program (PA CURE). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official views of any of these organizations. REFERENCES [1] A. Craik, Y. He, and J. L. Contreras-Vidal, “Deep learning for electroencephalogram (EEG) classification tasks: a review,” J. Neural Eng., vol. 16, no. 3, p. 031001, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1088/1741-2552/ab0ab5. [2] A. C. Bridi, T. Q. Louro, and R. C. L. Da Silva, “Clinical Alarms in intensive care: implications of alarm fatigue for the safety of patients,” Rev. Lat. Am. Enfermagem, vol. 22, no. 6, p. 1034, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1590/0104-1169.3488.2513. [3] M. Golmohammadi, V. Shah, I. Obeid, and J. Picone, “Deep Learning Approaches for Automatic Seizure Detection from Scalp Electroencephalograms,” in Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology: Emerging Trends in Research and Applications, 1st ed., I. Obeid, I. Selesnick, and J. Picone, Eds. New York, New York, USA: Springer, 2020, pp. 233–274. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36844-9_8. [4] “CFM Olympic Brainz Monitor.” [Online]. Available: https://newborncare.natus.com/products-services/newborn-care-products/newborn-brain-injury/cfm-olympic-brainz-monitor. [Accessed: 17-Jul-2020]. [5] M. L. Scheuer, S. B. Wilson, A. Antony, G. Ghearing, A. Urban, and A. I. Bagic, “Seizure Detection: Interreader Agreement and Detection Algorithm Assessments Using a Large Dataset,” J. Clin. Neurophysiol., 2020. https://doi.org/10.1097/WNP.0000000000000709. [6] A. Harati, M. Golmohammadi, S. Lopez, I. Obeid, and J. Picone, “Improved EEG Event Classification Using Differential Energy,” in Proceedings of the IEEE Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology Symposium, 2015, pp. 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1109/SPMB.2015.7405421. [7] V. Shah, C. Campbell, I. Obeid, and J. Picone, “Improved Spatio-Temporal Modeling in Automated Seizure Detection using Channel-Dependent Posteriors,” Neurocomputing, 2021. [8] W. Tatum, A. Husain, S. Benbadis, and P. Kaplan, Handbook of EEG Interpretation. New York City, New York, USA: Demos Medical Publishing, 2007. [9] D. P. Bovet and C. Marco, Understanding the Linux Kernel, 3rd ed. O’Reilly Media, Inc., 2005. https://www.oreilly.com/library/view/understanding-the-linux/0596005652/. [10] V. Shah et al., “The Temple University Hospital Seizure Detection Corpus,” Front. Neuroinform., vol. 12, pp. 1–6, 2018. https://doi.org/10.3389/fninf.2018.00083. [11] F. Pedregosa et al., “Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python,” J. Mach. Learn. Res., vol. 12, pp. 2825–2830, 2011. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/1953048.2078195. [12] J. Gotman, D. Flanagan, J. Zhang, and B. Rosenblatt, “Automatic seizure detection in the newborn: Methods and initial evaluation,” Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol., vol. 103, no. 3, pp. 356–362, 1997. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0013-4694(97)00003-9. 
    more » « less