Microfilms International 300 N
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
A Comparison Of The Effects Of Analysis Techniques And Computer Systems In Remote Sensing Technology And A Reference Data Collection Technique Item Type Thesis Authors Spencer, Joellen Page Download date 27/09/2021 05:45:31 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/11122/9305 INFORMATION TO USERS This reproduction was made from a copy of a document sent to us for microfilming. While the most advanced technology has been used to photograph and reproduce this document, the quality of the reproduction is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help clarify markings or notations which may appear on this reproduction. 1. The sign or “target” for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is “Missing Page(s)”. If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating adjacent pages to assure complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black mark, it is an indication of either blurred copy because of movement during exposure, duplicate copy, or copyrighted materials that should not have been filmed. For blurred pages, a good image of the page can be found in the adjacent frame. If copyrighted materials were deleted, a target note will appear listing the pages in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., is part of the material being photographed, a definite method of “sectioning” the material has been followed. It is customary to begin filming at the upper left hand comer of a large sheet and to continue from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. If necessary, sectioning is continued again—beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. For illustrations that cannot be satisfactorily reproduced by xerographic means, photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and inserted into your xerographic copy. These prints are available upon request from the Dissertations Customer Services Department. 5. Some pages in any document may have indistinct print. In all cases the best available copy has been filmed. Universe Microfilms International 300 N. Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, Ml 48106 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 8303735 Spencer, JoEllen Page A COMPARISON OF THE EFFECTS OF ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES AND COMPUTER SYSTEMS IN REMOTE SENSING TECHNOLOGY AND A REFERENCE DATA COLLECTION TECHNIQUE University of Alaska Ph.D. 1981 University Microfilms International300 N. Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48106 Copyright 1981 by Spencer, JoEllen Page All Rights Reserved Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. PLEASE NOTE: In all cases this material has been filmed in the best possible way from the available copy. Problems encountered with this document have been identified here with a check mark V . 1. Glossy photographs or pages_____ 2. Colored illustrations, paper or print_____ 3. Photographs with dark backgroundV 4. Illustrations are poor copy 5. Pages with black marks, not original copy______ 6. Print shows through as there is text on both sides of_____ page 7. Indistinct, broken or small print on several pages\/ 8. Print exceeds margin requirements_____ 9. Tightly bound copy with print lost in spine______ 10. Computer printout pages with indistinct print_____ 11. Page(s)___________lacking when material received, and not available from school or author. 12. Page(s)___________seem to be missing in numbering only as text follows. 13. Two pages numbered___________. Text follows. 14. Curling and wrinkled pages______ 15. Other__________________________________________________________________ University Microfilms International Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. A COMPARISON OF THE EFFECTS OF ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES AND COMPUTER SYSTEMS IN REMOTE SENSING TECHNOLOGY AND A REFERENCE DATA COLLECTION TECHNIQUE A THESIS Presented to the Faculty of the University of Alaska in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY By JoEllen Page Spencer, B.S. Biology; M.A. Plant Ecology Fairbanks, Alaska December, 1981 Copyright 1981. JoEllen Page Spencer Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. A COMPARISON OF THE EFFECTS OF ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES AND COMPUTER SYSTEMS IN REMOTE SENSING TECHNOLOGY AND A REFERENCE DATA COLLECTION TECHNIQUE RECOMMENDED: APPROVED = Yice Chancellor for Research and Advanced Study ^ 5?*- f f ^ --- Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ABSTRACT A technique for collecting and recording reference data which considers the spectral and spatial characteristics of Landsat data, the computer system being used, and the gradient nature of wildland vegetation was developed and described. Different analysis techniques for four critical factors affecting the accuracy of computer-aided analysis products were evaluated. Comparisons were made on the basis of accuracy evaluations of two methods of data/analyst interface, three methods of deriving training statistics, three methods of spectral class descriptions, and two levels of map category detail. The primary data set used was digital Landsat multispectral data for a study area around Fairbanks, Alaska. Reference data were developed from field work and photo-interpretation. The training methods compared were supervised, unsupervised, and modified clustering. The three spectral class description methods were: 1 ) labels derived from the training data; 2) the color display screen; and 3) from ground plot data. Community level cover types were compared with generalized map categories. The effect of post classification stratification was evaluated. The reference data technique provides geographically located stands and cover types identifications with a flexible coding system that can be aggregated to correspond to the spectral data categories. No difference in classification accuracy was found for an experienced analyst using a printout oriented system such as EDITOR or a screen oriented system such as IDIMS. The modified cluster method of iii Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. developing training statistics was more effective and efficient than supervised or unsupervised training methods. The use of ground plot data and subsequent stratification improved the descriptions of spectral classes. Generalized mapping categories were more accurate than detailed mapping categories. Knowledge of the ecologic, floristic, and spectral characteristics of the cover types in the study area is necessary to develop spectral class descriptions and stratification criteria. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. TABLE OF CONTENTS page Abstract ili List of Figures viii List of Tables x Acknowledgments xii Chapter I. Introduction and Background 1 1.1. Objectives and Justification 4 1.2. Description of Study Area 9 1.2.1. Physical Features 9 1.2.2. Vegetation H 1.3. Descriptions of Major Cover Types 13 1.4. Primary and Ancillary Data 28 1.5. Overview of Computer-aided Analysis 3^ 1.6. Background 35 1.6.1. History 35 1.6.2. Literature Review 39 II. Methods 49 2.1. Systems Overview 5^ 2.2. Training Methods 52 2.3. IDIMS Analysis 54 2.3.1. Data entry 54 2.3.2. Supervised training 55 v . Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont'd) Page 2.3.3. Unsupervised training 57 2.3.4. Modified cluster training 59 2.3.5. Precision geometric correction 60 2.3.6. Final products 61 2.4. EDITOR Analysis 62 2.4.1. Data entry 62 2.4.2. Supervised training 66 2.4.3. Unsupervised training 69 2.4.4. Modified cluster training 71 2.4.5. Precision geometric correction and final products • 72 2.5. Reference Data 74 2.5.1. Landcover Coding System 76 2.5.2. Field work 82 2.5.3. Photo-interpretation 87 2.6. Spectral Class Descriptions 89 2.6.1. Spectral class descriptions derived from training 91 2.6.2. Spectral class descriptions from the color display screen 93 2.6.3. Spectral class descriptions from the ground plots 95 2.7. Accuracy Evaluations 101 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. vii TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont'd) page III. Results and Discussion 111 3.1. Reference Data Collection and Coding 111 3.2. Classification Accuracies 115 3.3. Systems Comparison: IDIMS and EDITOR 119 3.4. Comparison of Training Methods 124 3.5. Comparison of Spectral Class Description Methods 127 3.6. Comparison of Mapping Category Detail 137 IV. Summary and Conclusions 139 References Cited 143 Appendix A. Final Statistics for Classifications 149 B. Spectral Class Descriptions 159 C. Accuracy Evaluations 166 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 1.1. Fairbanks study