Paper detail

Dense v.s. Sparse: A Comparative Study of Sampling Analysis in Scene Classification of High-Resolution Remote Sensing Imagery

Scene classification is a key problem in the interpretation of high-resolution remote sensing imagery. Many state-of-the-art methods, e.g. bag-of-visual-words model and its variants, the topic models as well as deep learning-based approaches, share similar procedures: patch sampling, feature description/learning and classification. Patch sampling is the first and a key procedure which has a great influence on the results. In the literature, many different sampling strategies have been used, {e.g. dense sampling, random sampling, keypoint-based sampling and saliency-based sampling, etc. However, it is still not clear which sampling strategy is suitable for the scene classification of high-resolution remote sensing images. In this paper, we comparatively study the effects of different sampling strategies under the scenario of scene classification of high-resolution remote sensing images. We divide the existing sampling methods into two types: dense sampling and sparse sampling, the later of which includes random sampling, keypoint-based sampling and various saliency-based sampling proposed recently. In order to compare their performances, we rely on a standard bag-of-visual-words model to construct our testing scheme, owing to their simplicity, robustness and efficiency. The experimental results on two commonly used datasets show that dense sampling has the best performance among all the strategies but with high spatial and computational complexity, random sampling gives better or comparable results than other sparse sampling methods, like the sophisticated multi-scale key-point operators and the saliency-based methods which are intensively studied and commonly used recently.

preprint2015arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.