Curve matching approaches to waveform classification: a case study using ICESat data |
| |
| Authors: | Yuhong Zhou Feng Ni Yifei Lou Caiyun Zhang Mohammed Alfarhan |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Department of Geospatial Information Science, University of Texas at Dallas, 800 W Campbell Rd. GR31, Richardson, TX 75080-3021, USA;2. Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Texas at Dallas, 800 W Campbell Rd. GR31, Richardson, TX 75080-3021, USA;3. Department of Geosciences, Florida Atlantic University, 777 Glades Road, Boca Raton, FL 33431, USA;4. National Center for Remote Sensing Technology, King Abdulaziz City for Sciences and Technology, Riyadh 11442, Saudi Arabia |
| |
| Abstract: | Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) waveforms are being increasingly used in many forest and urban applications, especially for ground feature classification. However, most studies relied on either discretizing waveforms to multiple returns or extracting shape metrics from waveforms. The direct use of the full waveform, which contains the most comprehensive and accurate information has been scarcely explored. We proposed to utilize the complete waveform to test its ability to differentiate between objects having distinct vertical structures using curve matching approaches. Two groups of curve matching approaches were developed by extending methods originally designed for pixel-based hyperspectral image classification and object-based high spatial image classification. The first group is based on measuring the curve similarity between an unknown waveform and a reference waveform, including curve root sum squared differential area (CRSSDA), curve angle mapper (CAM), and Kullback–Leibler (KL) divergence. The second group assesses the curve similarity between an unknown and reference cumulative distribution functions (CDFs) of their waveforms, including cumulative curve root sum squared differential area (CCRSSDA), cumulative curve angle mapper (CCAM), and Kolmogorov–Smirnov (KS) distance. When employed to classify open space, trees, and buildings using ICESat waveform data, KL provided the highest average classification accuracy (87%), closely followed by CCRSSDA and CCAM, and they all significantly outperformed KS, CRSSDA, and CAM based on 15 randomized sample sets. |
| |
| Keywords: | waveform classification curve matching ICESat/GLAS |
|
|
