Advertisement

Moving from Pixels to Parcels: the Use of Possibility Theory to Explore the Uncertainty Associated object Oriented Remote Sensing

  • Alexis Comber
  • Alan Brown
  • Katie Medcalf
  • Richard Lucas
  • Daniel Clewley
  • Johanna Breyer
  • Peter Bunting
  • Steve Keyworth
Part of the Lecture Notes in Geoinformation and Cartography book series (LNGC)

Abstract

This paper explores the issues relating to uncertainty in the application of object oriented classifications of remote sensing data. Object oriented remote sensing software such as eCognition (now known as Definiens Developer) provides the user with flexibility in the way that data is classified through segmentation routines and user-specified fuzzy rules. However the aggregation of fuzzy data objects such as pixels to higher level parcels for the purpose of policy reporting is not straightforward. This paper explores the uncertainty issues relating to the aggregation from fine detailed (uncertain) objects of one classification system to coarser grain (uncertain) objects of another classification scheme. We show Possibility Theory to be an appropriate formalism for managing the non-additive uncertainty commonly associated with classified remote sensing data. Results are presented for a small area of upland Wales to illustrate the value of the approach.

Keywords

Possibility Theory Land Cover Uncertainty 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Cherrill, A. and McClean, C. (1999). “Between-observer variation in the application of a standard method of habitat mapping by environmental consultants in the UK”, Journal of Applied Ecology, 36, 989–1008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Comber, A.J., Law, A.N.R., Lishman, J.R., (2004a). Application of knowledge for automated land cover change monitoring. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 25(16): 3177-3192.Google Scholar
  3. Comber, A., Fisher, P., Wadsworth, R. (2004b). “Integrating land cover data with different ontologies: identifying change from inconsistency”, International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 18(7), 691-708.Google Scholar
  4. Comber, A.J., Law, A.N.R., Lishman, J.R. (2004c). “A comparison of Bayes’, Dempster-Shafter and endorsement theories for managing knowledge uncertainty in the context of land cover monitoring”, Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 28(4), 311-327Google Scholar
  5. Comber A.J, Fisher, P.F. and Brown, A. (forthcoming). “Uncertainty, vagueness and indiscernibility: the impact of spatial scale in relation to the landscape elements”, paper accepted for publication in ISPRSGoogle Scholar
  6. Definiens (2008). http://www.definiens.com/ [available 10$th$ January 2008]Google Scholar
  7. Dubois, D. and Prade H. (2001). “Possibility theory, probability theory and multiple-valued logics: A clarification”, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, 32, 35–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fisher, P, Arnot, C, Wadsworth, R and Wellens, J, (2006). “Detecting change in vague interpretations of landscapes”, Ecological Informatics 1(2), 163-178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fuller, R. M., Smith, G. M., Sanderson, J. M., Hill, R. A., and Thomson, A. G. (2002). “Land Cover Map 2000: construction of a parcel-based vector map from satellite images”, Cartographic Journal, 39, 15–25.Google Scholar
  10. JNCC (1990). Handbook for Phase 1 Habitat Survey: Handbook and Field Manual: Technique for Environmental Audit, Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC), PeterboroughGoogle Scholar
  11. Jones, P.S., Stevens, D.P., Blackstock, T.H., Burrows, C.R. and Howe, E.A. (2003). Priority habitats of Wales: a technical guide. Countryside Council for Wales, Bangor.Google Scholar
  12. Lucas, R., Rowlands, A., Brown, A., Keyworth, S. and Bunting, P. (2007). “Rule-based classification of multi-temporal satellite imagery for habitat and agricultural land cover mapping”, ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, 62(3), 165-185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Rodwell J.S. (editor), (1991). British Plant Communities. 5 volumes. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.Google Scholar
  14. UK Government, 1994. Biodiversity: the UK Action Plan, HMSO, London.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alexis Comber
    • 1
  • Alan Brown
    • 2
  • Katie Medcalf
    • 3
  • Richard Lucas
    • 4
  • Daniel Clewley
    • 3
  • Johanna Breyer
    • 4
  • Peter Bunting
    • 4
  • Steve Keyworth
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of GeographyUniversity of LeicesterLeicesterUK
  2. 2.Countryside Council for WalesBangorUK
  3. 3.Environment Systems8G Cefn Llan Science ParkAberystwythUK
  4. 4.Institute of Geography and Earth SciencesAberystwyth UniversityUK

Personalised recommendations