[科技]遥感技术与应用-6-遥感专题信息提取.ppt

Classification Accuracy Assessment Another area that is continuing to receive increased attention by remote sensing specialists is that of classification accuracy assessment. Historically, the ability to produce digital land cover classifications far exceeded the ability to meaningfully quantify their accuracy. In fact, this problem sometimes precluded the application of automated land cover classification techniques even when their cost compared favorably with more traditional means of data collection. The lesson to be learned here is embodied in the expression “ A classification is not complete until its accuracy is assessed”. Classification error matrix One of the most common means of expressing classification accuracy is the preparation of a classification error matrix (sometimes called a confusion matrix or a contingency table). Error matrices compare, on a category-by-category basis, the relationship between known reference data (ground truth) and the corresponding results of an automated classification. Such matrices are square, with the number of rows and columns equal to the number of categories whose classification accuracy is being assessed. `Table 7.3 is an error matrix that an image analyst has prepared to determine how well a classification has categorized a representative subset of pixels used in the training process of a supervised classification. This matrix stems from classifying the sampled training set pixels and listing the known cover types used for training (columns) versus the pixels actually classified into each land cover category by the classifier (rows) Several characteristics about classification performance are expressed by an error matrix. For example, one can study the various classification errors of omission (inclusion). Note in the above table that the training set pixels that are classified into the proper land cover categories are located along the major diagonal of the error matrix (running from upper left to low right). All