Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Performance evaluation of dimensionality reduction techniques on hyperspectral data for mineral exploration

  • REVIEW
  • Published:
Earth Science Informatics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

With recent advances in hardware and wide range of applications, hyperspectral remote sensing proves to be a promising technology for analysing terrain. However, the sheer volume of bands, strong inter band correlation and redundant information makes interpretation of hyperspectral data a tedious task. Aforementioned issues can be addressed to a considerable extent by reducing the dimensionality of hyperspectral data. Though plethora of algorithms exist to downsize hyperspectral data, quality assessment of these techniques remains unanswered. Since Dimensionality Reduction (DR) is a special case of unsupervised learning, classification accuracy cannot be directly used to compare the performance of different dimensionality reduction techniques. As a consequence, a different type of goodness measure is essential which is expected to be easily interpretable, robust against outliers and applicable to most algorithms and datasets. In this paper, fifteen popular dimensionality reduction algorithms are reviewed, evaluated and compared on hyperspectral dataset for mineral exploration. The performance of various DR algorithms is tested on hyperspectral mineral data since the extensive study of DR for mineral mapping is scarce compared to land cover mapping. Also, DR techniques are evaluated based on coranking criteria which is independent of label information. This facilitates to demonstrate the robust technique for mineral mapping and also provides meaningful insight into topology preservation. These techniques play a vital role in mineral exploration since in field observation is expensive, time consuming and requires more man power. From experimental results it is evident that, deep autoencoders provide better embedding with a quality index value of 0.9938, when K = 120 compared to other existing nonlinear techniques. The conclusions presented are unique since previous studies have not evaluated the results qualitatively and comparison between conventional machine learning and deep learning algorithms is limited.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of data and materials

The dataset is freely available for research in the website, http://lesun.weebly.com/hyperspectral-data-set.html.

References

  • Adep RN, Vijayan AP, Shetty A, Ramesh H (2016) Performance evaluation of hyperspectral classification algorithms on AVIRIS mineral data. Perspect Sci 8:722–726

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aydin F (2022) A class-driven approach to dimension embedding. Expert Syst Appl 195:116650

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bachmann CM, Ainsworth TL, Fusina RA (2005) Exploiting manifold geometry in hyperspectral imagery. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens 43(3):441–454

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belkin M, Niyogi P (2001) Laplacian eigenmaps and spectral techniques for embedding and clustering. Advances in neural information processing systems, vol 14. MIT Press, pp 585–591

  • Ben Hamida A, Benoit A, Lambert P, Chokri Ben A (2016) Deep learning approach for remote sensing image analysis. In: Big Data from Space (BiDS’16), Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Spain, pp 133–142

  • Borg I, Groenen P (1997) Modern multidimensional scaling: theory and applications. Springer Science and Business Media, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Clark RN, Swayze GA (1995) Mapping minerals, amorphous materials, environmental materials, vegetation, water, ice, snow and other materials: the USGS tricorder algorithm. Summaries of the Fifth Annual JPL Airborne Earth Science Workshop, JPL Publication, pp 39–40

  • Coifman RR, Lafon S (2006) Diffusion maps. Appl Comput Harmon Anal 21(1):5–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fauvel M, Chanussot J, Benediktsson J (2009) Kernel principal component analysis for the classification of hyperspectral remote sensing data of urban areas. EURASIP J Adv Signal Process 783194:1–14

    Google Scholar 

  • Gracia A, Gonzalez S, Robles V, Menasalvas E (2014) A methodology to compare dimensionality reduction algorithms in terms of loss of quality. Inf Sci 270:1–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green E (1998) Imaging spectroscopy and the AVIRIS. Remote Sens Environ 65(3):227–248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • He K, Zhang X, Ren S, Sun J (2016) Deep residual learning for image recognition. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), Las Vegas, United States, pp 770–778

  • Hinton G, Roweis S (2003) Stochastic neighbour embedding. Adv Neural Inf Process Syst 15:833–840

    Google Scholar 

  • Hinton GE, Salakhutdinov RR (2006) Reducing the dimensionality of data with neural networks. Science 313(5786):504–507

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes (1968) On the mean accuracy of statistical pattern recognizers. IEEE Trans Inform Theory 14(1):55–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huilin Xu, Zhang H, He W, Zhang L (2019) Superpixel-based spatial spectral dimension reduction for hyperspectral image classification. Neurocomputing 300:138–150

    Google Scholar 

  • Jollifie I (2011) Principal component analysis. International encyclopedia of statistical science. Springer, pp 1094–1096

  • Kim D, Finkel L (2003) Hyperspectral image processing using locally linear embedding. First International IEEE embs conference in neural engineering, pp 316–319

  • Kruse FA, Boardman JW, Huntington JF (2003) Comparison of airborne hyperspectral data and EO-1 Hyperion for mineral mapping. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens 41(6):1388–1400

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee JA, Verleysen M (2009) Quality assessment of dimensionality reduction: rank based criteria. Neurocomputing. 72(7):1431–1433

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li Y, Zhang H, Shen Q (2017) Spectral-spatial classification of hyperspectral imagery with 3D convolutional neural network. Remote Sensing 9(1):67–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luo F, Huang H, Ma Z, Liu J (2016) Semi-supervised sparse manifold discriminative analysis for feature extraction of hyperspectral images. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens 54(10):6197–6211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luo Y, Zou J, Yao C, Li T, Bai G (2018) HSI-CNN: a novel convolution neural network for hyperspectral image. International conference on audio, language and image processing, pp 464–469

  • Luo F, Zhang L, Zhou X, Guo T, Cheng Y, Yin T (2019) Sparse-adaptive hypergraph discriminant analysis for hyperspectral image classification. IEEE Geosci Remote Sens Lett 17(6):1082–1086

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luo F, Zhang L, Du B, Zhang L (2020) Dimensionality reduction with enhanced hybrid-graph discriminant learning for hyperspectral image classification. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens 58(8):5336–5535

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luo F, Zou Z, Liu J, Lin Z (2021) Dimensionality reduction and classification of hyperspectral image via multistructure unified discriminative embedding. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens 60:1–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Mokbel B, Lueks W, Gisbrecht A, Hammer B (2013) Visualizing the quality of dimensionality reduction. Neurocomputing 112:109–123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mou L, Ghamisi P, Zhu XX (2018) Unsupervised spectral-spatial feature learning via deep residual conv–deconv network for hyperspectral image classification. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens 56(1):391–406

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rasti B, Hong D, Hang R, Ghamisi P, Kang X, Chanussot J, Benediktsson JA (2020) Feature extraction for hyperspectral imagery: the evolution from shallow to deep: overview and toolbox. IEEE Geosci Remote Sens Mag 8(4):60–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodarmel JS (2002) Principal component analysis for hyperspectral image classification. Surv Land Inf Syst 62(2):115–123

    Google Scholar 

  • Romero A, Gatta C, Camps-Valls G (2016) Unsupervised deep feature extraction for remote sensing image classification. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens 54(3):1349–1362

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smola, Scholkopf BB (2004) A tutorial on support vector regression. Stat Comput 14(3):199–222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van der Maaten L, Hinton G (2008) Visualizing data using t-sne. J Mach Learn Res 9:2579–2605

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Der Maaten L, Postma E, Van den Herik J (2009) Dimensionality reduction: a comparative review. J Mach Learn Res 10(13):66–71

    Google Scholar 

  • Vane G (1988) Terrestrial imaging spectroscopy. Remote Sens Environ 24(1):1–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weinberger KQ, Saul LK (2006) An introduction to nonlinear dimensionality reduction by maximum variance unfolding. In: AAAI, vol 6, pp 1683–1686

  • Ye J, Janardan R, Park CH, Park H (2004) An optimization criterion for generalized discriminant analysis on under-sampled problems. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 26(8):982–994

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang T, Yang J, Zhao D, Ge X (2007) Linear local tangent space alignment and application to face recognition. Neurocomputing 70(7):1547–1553

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao W, Guo Z, Yue J, Zhang X, Luo L (2015) On combining multiscale deep learning features for the classification of hyperspectral remote sensing imagery. Int J Remote Sens 36(13):3368–3379

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Institute of Technology Karnataka, Surathkal, Mangalore, India

    Deepa C, Amba Shetty & Narasimhadhan A V

Authors
  1. Deepa C
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Amba Shetty
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Narasimhadhan A V
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors have contributed equally in study conception and manuscript preparation.

Deepa C: Data collection, software, implementation and material preparation.

Dr. Amba Shetty: Data analysis, review and supervision.

Dr. Narasimhadhan A V: Conceptualization, writing and supervision.

All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Deepa C.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.

Additional information

Communicated by: H. 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.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

C, D., Shetty, A. & A V, N. Performance evaluation of dimensionality reduction techniques on hyperspectral data for mineral exploration. Earth Sci Inform 16, 25–36 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12145-023-00956-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12145-023-00956-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation