IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v14y2025i2p217-d1572863.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Interchangeability of Cross-Platform Orthophotographic and LiDAR Data in DeepLabV3+-Based Land Cover Classification Method

Author

Listed:
  • Shijun Pan

    (Graduate School of Environmental and Life Science, Okayama University, 2-1-1, Tsushima-Naka, Kita-ku, Okayama-shi 700-8530, Japan)

  • Keisuke Yoshida

    (Graduate School of Environmental and Life Science, Okayama University, 2-1-1, Tsushima-Naka, Kita-ku, Okayama-shi 700-8530, Japan)

  • Satoshi Nishiyama

    (Graduate School of Environmental and Life Science, Okayama University, 2-1-1, Tsushima-Naka, Kita-ku, Okayama-shi 700-8530, Japan)

  • Takashi Kojima

    (TOKEN C. E. E. Consultants Co., Ltd., 1-36-1 Azuma-cho, Omiya-ku, Saitama-shi 330-0841, Japan)

  • Yutaro Hashimoto

    (Graduate School of Environmental and Life Science, Okayama University, 2-1-1, Tsushima-Naka, Kita-ku, Okayama-shi 700-8530, Japan)

Abstract

Riverine environmental information includes important data to collect, and the data collection still requires personnel’s field surveys. These on-site tasks still face significant limitations (i.e., hard or danger to entry). In recent years, as one of the efficient approaches for data collection, air-vehicle-based Light Detection and Ranging technologies have already been applied in global environmental research, i.e., land cover classification (LCC) or environmental monitoring. For this study, the authors specifically focused on seven types of LCC (i.e., bamboo, tree, grass, bare ground, water, road, and clutter) that can be parameterized for flood simulation. A validated airborne LiDAR bathymetry system (ALB) and a UAV-borne green LiDAR System (GLS) were applied in this study for cross-platform analysis of LCC. Furthermore, LiDAR data were visualized using high-contrast color scales to improve the accuracy of land cover classification methods through image fusion techniques. If high-resolution aerial imagery is available, then it must be downscaled to match the resolution of low-resolution point clouds. Cross-platform data interchangeability was assessed by comparing the interchangeability, which measures the absolute difference in overall accuracy (OA) or macro-F1 by comparing the cross-platform interchangeability. It is noteworthy that relying solely on aerial photographs is inadequate for achieving precise labeling, particularly under limited sunlight conditions that can lead to misclassification. In such cases, LiDAR plays a crucial role in facilitating target recognition. All the approaches (i.e., low-resolution digital imagery, LiDAR-derived imagery and image fusion) present results of over 0.65 OA and of around 0.6 macro-F1. The authors found that the vegetation (bamboo, tree, grass) and road species have comparatively better performance compared with clutter and bare ground species. Given the stated conditions, differences in the species derived from different years (ALB from year 2017 and GLS from year 2020) are the main reason. Because the identification of clutter species includes all the items except for the relative species in this research, RGB-based features of the clutter species cannot be substituted easily because of the 3-year gap compared with other species. Derived from on-site reconstruction, the bare ground species also has a further color change between ALB and GLS that leads to decreased interchangeability. In the case of individual species, without considering seasons and platforms, image fusion can classify bamboo and trees with higher F1 scores compared to low-resolution digital imagery and LiDAR-derived imagery, which has especially proved the cross-platform interchangeability in the high vegetation types. In recent years, high-resolution photography (UAV), high-precision LiDAR measurement (ALB, GLS), and satellite imagery have been used. LiDAR measurement equipment is expensive, and measurement opportunities are limited. Based on this, it would be desirable if ALB and GLS could be continuously classified by Artificial Intelligence, and in this study, the authors investigated such data interchangeability. A unique and crucial aspect of this study is exploring the interchangeability of land cover classification models across different LiDAR platforms.

Suggested Citation

  • Shijun Pan & Keisuke Yoshida & Satoshi Nishiyama & Takashi Kojima & Yutaro Hashimoto, 2025. "Interchangeability of Cross-Platform Orthophotographic and LiDAR Data in DeepLabV3+-Based Land Cover Classification Method," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(2), pages 1-17, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:14:y:2025:i:2:p:217-:d:1572863
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/14/2/217/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/14/2/217/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rehab Mahmoud & Mohamed Hassanin & Haytham Al Feel & Rasha M. Badry, 2023. "Machine Learning-Based Land Use and Land Cover Mapping Using Multi-Spectral Satellite Imagery: A Case Study in Egypt," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-21, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tesfamariam Engida Mengesha & Lulseged Tamene Desta & Paolo Gamba & Getachew Tesfaye Ayehu, 2024. "Multi-Temporal Passive and Active Remote Sensing for Agricultural Mapping and Acreage Estimation in Context of Small Farm Holds in Ethiopia," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-29, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:14:y:2025:i:2:p:217-:d:1572863. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.