WV-2 [38] | Larsemann Hills, Antarctica | SVM, MXL, NNC, SAM and Winner Takes All (WTA) | Results indicate that the WTA integration and the SVM classification methods were more accurate than the MXL, NNC, and SAM classification methods. |
QB and WV-2 [39] | São Paulo, Brazil | DT, RF, SVM, Regression tree (RT) | RF achieved the highest accuracy (κ = 0.95), followed either by the RT (κ = 0.85) or the DT (κ = 0.77). The SVM, maybe due to the high dimensionality and over-fitting issues, was the algorithm that performed the worst. |
GE-1 and WV-2 [28] | Cuevas del Almanzora, southern Spain | OOC-NN and SVM | The overall accuracy attained by applying NN and SVM to the four MS bands of GE-1 were very similar to those computed from WV-2, for either four or eight MS bands. The best overall accuracy values were close to 90%, and they were not improved by using multi-angle ortho-images. |
GE-1 and QB [27] | Fredericton, Canada | FM and CM | The overall accuracies using FM stand higher than those of CM. The overall accuracy and kappa coefficient for QB image classification was better than that of the GE-1 image. |
IKONOS [40] | Tanzania | OOC using mathematical and morphology analysis | OOC based on multi-resolution segmentation and mathematical morphology analysis procedures performs best with a spatial accuracy above 85% and a statistical accuracy above 97%. |
SPOT [41] | Nile river, Egypt | Contextual classifier, MXL and MD | The MXL classifier yielded the best classification accuracy (up to 97%) compared to the other two classifiers. |
SPOT and Landsat TM [42] | Northern Territory Tropical Savanna, Australia | Supervised image classification with and without ancillary data―NDVI, DEM, slope model & hydrology. | The producer accuracy on average (40%) was higher for the image classification (without ancillary data) and a marginal difference in user accuracy (5%). For the integrated approach (image plus ancillary data) producer and user accuracies were 34% and 35% respectively. |
IRS LISS III [43] | East Sikkim, India | BAN and hybrid classification. | Overall accuracy was found to be 90.53% using the BAN classifier and 91.57% using the Hybrid classifier. |
GE-1 [26] | Beijing, China. | BAN and NBC | The best mean overall classification accuracy is 86.2% (BAN). As expected, BAN gives better classification results than NBC. |
WV-2 [44] | University Putra, Malaysia | OOC including fuzzy rule-based and SVM | Classification result of supervised SVM contained mixed objects and misclassifications of impervious surfaces and other urban features. Rule-based classifier (overall accuracy = 93.07%) performed better than supervised SVM (overall accuracy = 85.02%) resulting in finer discrimination of spatially and spectrally similar objects. |