Submitted:
26 June 2024
Posted:
27 June 2024
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
- We develop a cost-effective and efficient methodology for preparing semantic segmentation datasets, mitigating the high costs associated with data collection.
- We contribute to the field by presenting a unique land cover dataset manually annotated for seven distinct classes, addressing the segmentation of grasslands, arable land, herb-dominated habitats, hedgerows, vineyards, tree-dominated man-made habitats, and Olea europea groves simultaneously.
- Through meticulous data acquisition, preprocessing, and model selection, we demonstrate the effectiveness of deep learning models such as UNet, SegNet, and DeepLabV3 in accurately delineating land cover classes.
- Conduct a comparative analysis of three semantic segmentation models, each with different backbones, to identify the most suitable model for aerial imagery mapping, thereby improving the accuracy and efficiency of land cover mapping efforts.
- The results of our experiments underscore the importance of incorporating deep learning techniques and a pre-trained backbone in land cover mapping applications, offering scalable and efficient solutions for environmental monitoring and conservation efforts.
2. Materials and Methods



- Grassland: A type of habitat dominated by grasses, with few or no trees. Grasslands can be found in various regions and climates, from tropical to temperate.
- Arboreal land: Refers to land or habitats that are predominantly covered with trees. These areas may include forests, woodlands, and other tree-dominated ecosystems.
- Herb-dominated habitats: Habitats where herbs, or nonwoody plants, are the dominant vegetation. These habitats can range from meadows and prairies to marshes and wetlands.
- Hedgerows: Linear strips of vegetation, typically consisting of shrubs, small trees, and grasses, often used to mark boundaries or provide wildlife habitat in agricultural landscapes.
- Vineyards: Agricultural landscapes specifically cultivated for growing grapevines, typically for wine production. Vineyards can vary in size and management practices.
- Tree-dominated man-made habitats: Human-modified landscapes where trees are the predominant vegetation, such as urban parks, orchards, and landscaped gardens.
- Olea europaea groves: Groves or orchards of olive trees, primarily cultivated for the production of olives and olive oil. These groves are commonly found in Mediterranean regions
3. Experiment
3.1. Backbones
- A.
- ResNet
- B.
- Inception
- C.
- DensNet
- D.
- EfficientNet
3.2. Semantic Segmentation Models
A. UNet
B. SegNet
C. DeepLab
4. Result
- Accuracy: This metric measures the overall correctness of the segmentation by calculating the ratio of correctly predicted pixels to the total number of pixels.
- Precision: Precision quantifies the model’s ability to correctly identify positive predictions among all predicted positives. It’s calculated as the ratio of true positives to the sum of true positives and false positives.
- Recall: Recall, also known as sensitivity, measures the ability of the model to detect all relevant instances of the class in the image. It’s calculated as the ratio of true positives to the sum of true positives and false negatives.
- F1 Score: The F1 score is the harmonic mean of precision and recall. It provides a balanced measure between precision and recall and is calculated as 2 * (precision * recall) / (precision + recall).
- Mean IoU: Mean IoU calculates the average IoU across all classes. It’s a popular metric for semantic segmentation tasks as it provides an overall measure of segmentation accuracy across different classes.
- Jaccard Score (IoU): The Jaccard score, or Intersection over Union (IoU), measures the ratio of the intersection of the predicted and ground truth segmentation masks to their union. It evaluates the overlap between the predicted and ground truth regions.
5. Discussion
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Pal M, Mather PM. Support vector machines for classification in remote sensing. International Journal of Remote Sensing [Internet]. 2005 Mar 1 [cited 2024 Feb 20];26(5):1007–11. Available from. [CrossRef]
- Pal M, Mather PM. An assessment of the effectiveness of decision tree methods for land cover classification. Remote Sensing of Environment [Internet]. 2003 Aug 30 [cited 2024 Feb 20];86(4):554–65. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0034425703001329.
- Cutler DR, Edwards Jr. TC, Beard KH, Cutler A, Hess KT, Gibson J, et al. Random Forests for Classification in Ecology. Ecology [Internet]. 2007 [cited 2024 Feb 20];88(11):2783–92. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1890/07-0539.1.
- Gauci A, Abela J, Austad M, Cassar LF, Zarb Adami K. A Machine Learning approach for automatic land cover mapping from DSLR images over the Maltese Islands. Environmental Modelling & Software [Internet]. 2018 Jan 1 [cited 2024 Apr 2];99:1–10. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S136481521630487X.
- Mardani M, Mardani H, De Simone L, Varas S, Kita N, Saito T. Integration of Machine Learning and Open Access Geospatial Data for Land Cover Mapping. Remote Sensing [Internet]. 2019 Jan [cited 2024 Apr 2];11(16):1907. Available from: https://www.mdpi.com/2072-4292/11/16/1907.
- Pelletier C, Valero S, Inglada J, Champion N, Dedieu G. Assessing the robustness of Random Forests to map land cover with high-resolution satellite image time series over large areas. Remote Sensing of Environment [Internet]. 2016 Dec 15 [cited 2024 Apr 2];187:156–68. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0034425716303820.
- Ouchra, H.; Belangour, A.; Erraissi, A. Machine Learning Algorithms for Satellite Image Classification Using Google Earth Engine and Landsat Satellite Data: Morocco Case Study. IEEE Access 2023, 11, 71127–71142. Available online: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10177754 (accessed on 2 April 2024). [CrossRef]
- Han R, Liu P, Wang G, Zhang H, Wu X. Advantage of Combining OBIA and Classifier Ensemble Method for Very High-Resolution Satellite Imagery Classification. Journal of Sensors [Internet]. 2020 Nov 25 [cited 2024 Apr 2];2020: e8855509. Available from: https://www.hindawi.com/journals/js/2020/8855509/.
- Ma L, Liu Y, Zhang X, Ye Y, Yin G, Johnson BA. Deep learning in remote sensing applications: A meta-analysis and review. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing [Internet]. 2019 Jun 1 [cited 2024 Feb 20]; 152:166–77. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924271619301108.
- Zaabar N, Niculescu S, Kamel MM. Application of Convolutional Neural Networks with Object-Based Image Analysis for Land Cover and Land Use Mapping in Coastal Areas: A Case Study in Ain Témouchent, Algeria. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing [Internet]. 2022 [cited 2024 Apr 2]; 15:5177–89. Available from: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9803238.
- Zhang X, Han L, Han L, Zhu L. How Well Do Deep Learning-Based Methods for Land Cover Classification and Object Detection Perform on High-Resolution Remote Sensing Imagery? Remote Sensing [Internet]. 2020 Jan [cited 2024 May 13];12(3):417. Available from: https://www.mdpi.com/2072-4292/12/3/417.
- Ienco D, Gbodjo YJE, Gaetano R, Interdonato R. Weakly Supervised Learning for Land Cover Mapping of Satellite Image Time Series via Attention-Based CNN. IEEE Access [Internet]. 2020 [cited 2024 Apr 2]; 8:179547–60. Available from: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9197599.
- Yang N, Tang H. Semantic Segmentation of Satellite Images: A Deep Learning Approach Integrated with Geospatial Hash Codes. Remote Sensing [Internet]. 2021 Jan [cited 2024 Feb 20];13(14):2723. Available from: https://www.mdpi.com/2072-4292/13/14/2723.
- Yuan X, Shi J, Gu L. A review of deep learning methods for semantic segmentation of remote sensing imagery. Expert Systems with Applications [Internet]. 2021 May 1 [cited 2024 Feb 20];169:114417. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0957417420310836.
- Garcia-Garcia A, Orts-Escolano S, Oprea S, Villena-Martinez V, Garcia-Rodriguez J. A Review on Deep Learning Techniques Applied to Semantic Segmentation [Internet]. arXiv; 2017 [cited 2024 Feb 20]. Available from: http://arxiv.org/abs/1704.06857.
- Marmanis D, Wegner JD, Galliani S, Schindler K, Datcu M, Stilla U. SEMANTIC SEGMENTATION OF AERIAL IMAGES WITH AN ENSEMBLE OF CNNS. ISPRS Ann Photogramm Remote Sens Spatial Inf Sci [Internet]. 2016 Jun 6 [cited 2024 Feb 20]; III–3:473–80. Available from: https://isprs-annals.copernicus.org/articles/III-3/473/2016/.
- Li R, Zheng S, Duan C, Wang L, Zhang C. Land cover classification from remote sensing images based on multi-scale fully convolutional network. Geo-spatial Information Science [Internet]. 2022 Apr 3 [cited 2024 Apr 2];25(2):278–94. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/10095020.2021.2017237.
- Tzepkenlis A, Marthoglou K, Grammalidis N. Efficient Deep Semantic Segmentation for Land Cover Classification Using Sentinel Imagery. Remote Sensing [Internet]. 2023 Jan [cited 2024 Apr 2];15(8):2027. Available from: https://www.mdpi.com/2072-4292/15/8/2027.
- Xu R, Wang C, Zhang J, Xu S, Meng W, Zhang X. RSSFormer: Foreground Saliency Enhancement for Remote Sensing Land-Cover Segmentation. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing [Internet]. 2023 [cited 2024 Apr 2];32:1052–64. Available from: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/10026298.
- Längkvist M, Kiselev A, Alirezaie M, Loutfi A. Classification and Segmentation of Satellite Orthoimagery Using Convolutional Neural Networks. Remote Sensing [Internet]. 2016 Apr [cited 2024 Apr 2];8(4):329. Available from: https://www.mdpi.com/2072-4292/8/4/329.
- He, K.; Zhang, X.; Ren, S.; Sun, J. Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Las Vegas, NV, USA, 27–30 June 2016; pp. 770–778. Available online: https://openaccess.thecvf.com/content_cvpr_2016/html/He_Deep_Residual_Learning_CVPR_2016_paper.html (accessed on 22 April 2023).
- Szegedy, C.; Vanhoucke, V.; Ioffe, S.; Shlens, J.; Wojna, Z. Rethinking the Inception Architecture for Computer Vision. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Las Vegas, NV, USA, 27–30 June 2016; pp. 2818–2826. Available online: https://www.cv-foundation.org/openaccess/content_cvpr_2016/html/Szegedy_Rethinking_the_Inception_CVPR_2016_paper.html (accessed on 22 April 2023).
- Huang, G.; Liu, Z.; van der Maaten, L.; Weinberger, K.Q. Densely Connected Convolutional Networks. arXiv 2018.
- Tan M, Le QV. EfficientNet: Rethinking Model Scaling for Convolutional Neural Networks [Internet]. arXiv; 2020 [cited 2023 Sep 14]. Available from: http://arxiv.org/abs/1905.11946.
- Ronneberger O, Fischer P, Brox T. U-Net: Convolutional Networks for Biomedical Image Segmentation [Internet]. arXiv; 2015 [cited 2024 Feb 13]. Available from: http://arxiv.org/abs/1505.04597.
- Badrinarayanan V, Kendall A, Cipolla R. SegNet: A Deep Convolutional Encoder-Decoder Architecture for Image Segmentation. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence [Internet]. 2017 Dec [cited 2024 Apr 5];39(12):2481–95. Available from: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7803544.
- Chen LC, Papandreou G, Kokkinos I, Murphy K, Yuille AL. DeepLab: Semantic Image Segmentation with Deep Convolutional Nets, Atrous Convolution, and Fully Connected CRFs. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence [Internet]. 2018 Apr [cited 2024 Apr 5];40(4):834–48. Available from: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7913730.








| Performance metrics | UNet | SegNet | DeeplabV3 | |||
| Without backbone | With backbone | Without backbone | With backbone | Without backbone | With backbone | |
| Accuracy | 0.574 | 0.653 | 0.564 | 0.673 | 0.681 | 0.763 |
| Precision | 0.590 | 0.657 | 0.563 | 0.678 | 0.6855 | 0.761 |
| Recall | 0.574 | 0.653 | 0.566 | 0.673 | 0.681 | 0.763 |
| F1 score | 0.573 | 0.646 | 0.559 | 0.672 | 0.674 | 0.756 |
| Jaccard Coefficient (IOU) | 0.411 | 0.500 | 0.399 | 0.528 | 0.5308 | 0.626 |
| Mean IOU | 0.306 | 0.323 | 0.290 | 0.407 | 0.410 | 0.520 |
| Backbone | Accuracy | Precision | Recall | F1 score | Mean IOU | Jaccard Coefficient (IOU) |
| Resnet 34 | 70.83 | 73.29 | 70.84 | 70.77 | 46.32 | 56.90 |
| EfficientNetB0 | 76.33 | 76.10 | 76.30 | 75.60 | 52.00 | 62.60 |
| InceptionV3 | 71.46 | 74.00 | 71.46 | 72.01 | 47.50 | 61.40 |
| Densest | 75.07 | 76.18 | 75.05 | 74.66 | 50.70 | 61.75 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).