Abstract
Water classification in Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) images is an ongoing area of research, which has implications in environmental monitoring and water resource management. Adaptive threshold algorithms provide a fast, reliable and efficient way to perform automated water classification, but users often lack awareness on selecting the best algorithm for their specific application. This paper presents a comprehensive assessment of adaptive threshold algorithms for water delineation applied to L- and C-band SAR backscatter images. We introduce a novel approach for dynamic selection of windows within a SAR image to determine optimum thresholds on sigma naught values. A comparison of five threshold-determination techniques is performed which include Otsu, Kittler and Illingworth (KI), Gaussian Mixture Model (GMM), Quality Index (QI) and Gamma Maximum Likelihood Estimation (GMLE) algorithms. We observed that, for L-band SAR data, convex hull approach produced better kappa coefficient value with GMM, KI and GMLE algorithms. However, for C-band SAR, kappa coefficients were highest for convex hull method with GMM, KI, QI and GMLE approaches and noticeably higher (> 0.89) when compared to split window approach. Our analysis indicates that the proposed convex hull method for window selection performs better in both L- and C-band SAR images. The results of our analysis will help users in identifying the best adaptive algorithm for water delineation in L- and C-band SAR images.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data Availability
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
References
Alsdorf DE, Lettenmaier DP (2003) Tracking fresh water from space. Science 301(5639):1491–1494. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1089802
Bazi Y, Bruzzone L, Melgani F (2005) An unsupervised approach based on the generalized Gaussian model to automatic change detection in multitemporal SAR images. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens 43(4):874–887. https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2004.842441
Bovolo F, Bruzzone L (2007) A split-based approach to unsupervised change detection in large-size multitemporal images: Application to tsunami-damage assessment. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens 45(6):1658–1670. https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2007.895835
Dewan AM, Kumamoto T, Nishigaki M (2006) Flood hazard delineation in greater Dhaka, Bangladesh using an integrated GIS and remote sensing approach. Geocarto Int 21(2):33–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/10106040608542381
Downing JA, Prairie YT, Cole JJ, Duarte CM, Tranvik LJ, Striegl RG, McDowell WH, Kortelainen P, Caraco NF, Melack JM, Middelburg JJ (2006) The global abundance and size distribution of lakes, ponds, and impoundments. Limnol Oceanogr 51(5):2388–2397. https://doi.org/10.4319/lo.2006.51.5.2388
El Zaart A, Ziou D, Wang S, Jiang Q (2002) Segmentation of SAR images. Pattern Recogn 35(3):713–724. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0031-3203(01)00070-X
Evans TL, Costa M, Telmer K, Silva TS (2010) Using ALOS/PALSAR and RADARSAT-2 to map land cover and seasonal inundation in the Brazilian Pantanal. IEEE J Sel Top Appl Earth Obs Remote Sens 3(4):560–575. https://doi.org/10.1109/JSTARS.2010.2089042
Greifeneder F, Wagner W, Sabel D, Naeimi V (2018) Suitability of SAR imagery for automatic flood mapping in the Lower Mekong Basin. In: Kuenzer C, Leinenkugel P, Dech S (eds) Remote Sensing the Mekong, 1st edn. Routledge, London, pp 111–128. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315230665
Gstaiger V, Huth J, Gebhardt S, Wehrmann T, Kuenzer C (2012) Multi-sensoral and automated derivation of inundated areas using TerraSAR-X and ENVISAT ASAR data. Int J Remote Sens 33(22):7291–7304. https://doi.org/10.1080/01431161.2012.700421
Guan H, Huang J, Li L, Li X, Miao S, Su W, Ma Y, Niu Q, Huang H (2023) Improved Gaussian mixture model to map the flooded crops of VV and VH polarization data. Remote Sens Environ 295:113714. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2023.113714
Guo Z, Wu L, Huang Y, Guo Z, Zhao J, Li N (2022) Water-Body Segmentation for SAR Images: Past. Curr Future Remote Sens 14(7):1752. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs14071752
Huang W, DeVries B, Huang C, Lang MW, Jones JW, Creed IF, Carroll ML (2018) Automated extraction of surface water extent from Sentinel-1 data. Remote Sens 10(5):797. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs10050797
Kittler J, Illingworth J (1986) Minimum error thresholding. Pattern Recogn 19(1):41–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/0031-3203(86)90030-0
Kuenzer C, Guo H, Huth J, Leinenkugel P, Li X, Dech S (2013) Flood mapping and flood dynamics of the Mekong Delta: ENVISAT-ASAR-WSM based time series analyses. Remote Sens 5(2):687–715. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs5020687
Li Y, Martinis S, Plank S, Ludwig R (2018) An automatic change detection approach for rapid flood mapping in Sentinel-1 SAR data. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf 73:123–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jag.2018.05.023
Manavalan R (2018) Review of synthetic aperture radar frequency, polarization, and incidence angle data for mapping the inundated regions. J Appl Remote Sens 12(2):021501. https://doi.org/10.1117/1.JRS.12.021501
Manavalan R, Rao YS, Krishna Mohan B (2017) Comparative flood area analysis of C-band VH, VV, and L-band HH polarizations SAR data. Int J Remote Sens 38(16):4645–4654. https://doi.org/10.1080/01431161.2017.1325534
Martinis S, Rieke C (2015) Backscatter analysis using multi-temporal and multi-frequency SAR data in the context of flood mapping at River Saale, Germany. Remote Sens 7(6):7732–7752. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs70607732
Martinis S, Twele A, Voigt S (2009) Towards operational near real-time flood detection using a split-based automatic thresholding procedure on high resolution TerraSAR-X data. Nat Hazard 9(2):303–314. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-9-303-2009
Martinis S, Twele A, Voigt S, Strunz G (2014) Towards a global SAR-based flood mapping service. In: 2014 IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium 2355–2358. https://doi.org/10.1109/IGARSS.2014.6946944
Miasnikov AD, Rome JE, Haralick RM (2004) A hierarchical projection pursuit clustering algorithm. In: Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Pattern Recognition ICPR 2004:268–271. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICPR.2004.1334104
Nilsson C, Reidy CA, Dynesius M, Revenga C (2005) Fragmentation and flow regulation of the world’s large river systems. Science 308(5720):405–408. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1107887
Ogilvie A, Belaud G, Massuel S, Mulligan M, Le Goulven P, Calvez R (2018) Surface water monitoring in small water bodies: potential and limits of multi-sensor Landsat time series. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 22(8):4349–4380. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-4349-2018
Otsu N (1979) A threshold selection method from gray-level histograms. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 9(1):62–66. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.1979.4310076
Santoro M, Wegmüller U, Lamarche C, Bontemps S, Defourny P, Arino O (2015) Strengths and weaknesses of multi-year Envisat ASAR backscatter measurements to map permanent open water bodies at global scale. Remote Sens Environ 171:185–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2015.10.031
Shimada M, Tadono T, Rosenqvist A (2009) Advanced Land Observing Satellite (ALOS) and monitoring global environmental change. Proc IEEE 98(5):780–799. https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2009.2033724
Sinha L, Narulkar SM (2023) Application of modified enhanced differential evolution algorithms for reservoir operation during floods: a case study. Water Supply 23(9):3660–3674. https://doi.org/10.2166/ws.2023.213
Tao X, Paoletti ME, Haut JM, Ren P, Plaza J, Plaza A (2021) Endmember estimation with Maximum Distance Analysis. Remote Sens 13(4):713. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs13040713
Westerhoff RS, Kleuskens MP, Winsemius HC, Huizinga HJ, Brakenridge GR, Bishop C (2013) Automated global water mapping based on wide-swath orbital synthetic-aperture radar. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 17(2):651–663. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-17-651-2013
Acknowledgements
Authors wish to thank Mr. N.M. Desai, Director-SAC and Dr. Rashmi Sharma, DD-EPSA for their valuable guidance and support. Authors thank Dr. Anup Das, Scientist, SAC (ISRO) for providing ALOS2 data used in this study. NRSC’s Bhoonidhi Portal and ESA’s Copernicus data hub are gratefully acknowledged for providing EOS-04 and Sentinel-2 datasets used in this study.
Funding
This study was funded by the SARITA Program of Space Applications Centre (ISRO).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Conceptualization, A.G., R.P.; Methodology, A.G., V.B.J; Data processing, A.G.; Writing, A.G. R.P., P.K.G., Visualization; A.G., R.P., N.S.. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflicts of interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Additional information
Communicated by: Hassan Babaie
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Gujrati, A., Pradhan, R., Singh, N. et al. Adaptive water delineation algorithms for L- and C-band SAR imagery: a comparative analysis. Earth Sci Inform 17, 5011–5025 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12145-024-01417-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12145-024-01417-0