An Intelligent Assessment of Land Cover

Classification
by
using
Spectral
and
Statistical Texture Data Analysis
Salman Qadri*[a-b], Muzammil-ul-Rehman[a], Mutiullah[a], Muhammad
Amjad Iqbal[b], Muhammad Nazir[b]
[a] Faculty of Information Technology, The University of Central Punjab Lahore, Punjab 54000, Pakistan
[b] Department of Computer Science & IT, Faculty of Management Sciences, The Islamia University of
Bahawalpur, Punjab 63100, Pakistan.
*Author for correspondence; e-mail address: salman.qadri@iub.edu.pk

ABSTRACT
The main objective of this research was to find out the
importance of machine vision approach for the classification of five
types of land cover (LC), fertile, green pasture, desert-range land,
bare and Sutlej-river land. A novel spectra-statistical frame work was
design to classify the subjective land cover types accurately. The
above mentioned five types of land cover have strong correlation
among each other. On the basis of human perception, among these
three selected land cover like desert rangeland, Sutlej river land and
bare land have almost similar physical features and remaining two
fertile cultivate land (cropland) and green pasture (grass) are similar.
Remote sensing data of these five types land was acquired by using
handheld crop scan device MSR5 in the form of five spectral bands
(blue, green, red, infrared and microwave) while statistical texture
data was arranged with a digital camera by the transformation of
acquired images into 229 statistical texture features for each image.
out of which the most discriminant 30 features were obtained by
integrating the three statistical features selection techniques, Fisher
co-efficient (F), Probability Of Error plus Average Correlation Coefficient (POE+ACC), and Mutual Information Co-efficient (MI), while
no such feature selection procedure was required for spectral data
because in this data each scene was completely define on the basis of
above mentioned only five spectral bands. Capability of selected
statistical texture data clustering was verified by Non Linear
Discriminant Analysis (NDA) and Linear Discriminant Analysis (LDA)
approach was applied for spectral features. For classification, these
statistical and spectral features were deployed to artificial neural
network (ANN). By implementing cross validation method (80-20) we
received an accuracy of 91.3221% for statistical texture data and
96.40% for spectral data respectively.
Keywords: Textural features, Remote Sensing, Artificial Neural
Network, Land Cover, Mazda Software Version 4.6.
1. INTRODUCTION

Image
processing
and
remote sensing can play a vital
role for betterment of the
agriculture field [1]. By using this
technology, we can classify vast
land cover area into different
categories [2] .This would be
helpful not only for the socioeconomic sector but also fulfill
the needs of future. In twenty
first century, world is facing the
challenge of hunger, food and
poverty [3]. This issue can be
resolved by increase in crop
production and better utilization
of cultivated land. Land cover
information is necessary for
different policy making, planning
and management purposes like,
land record of forest, desert,
farmland, and wetland as well as
other biophysical resources are
required
for
land
cover
information.
Researchers
are
trying to get the benefits of
technology by involving it in
agriculture field [4]. It is being
tried to enhance the cultivated
land area and monitored the land
through intensive manual survey
[5].
For the success of such
surveys a heavy economical and
labor investment is required. In
developing
countries
like
Pakistan, it seems to be very
difficult to spend huge amount on
such projects.
Whether
directly
or
indirectly almost 50% population
of these countries is associated
with agriculture profession [6].
All
above
discussed
issues
highlight the importance of the
proper
classification,
management, better utilization,
crop growth and production of
the
land.
According
to

geographical distribution of land,

it is categorized into different
types like barren, fertile, rocky
and sandy etc. In Pakistan, the
conventional field based survey
system could not be properly
managed due to both economical
and technical limitations. For this
reason,
remote
sensing
technology has not been utilized
for natural resource management
up till now, as was proposed by
the relevant professionals [7]. A
two layer Conditional Random
Field (CRF) model for land cover
and land use classification was
proposed
[8].
Similarly
a
multilayer conditional random
field (MCRF) land classification
model was suggested. It was used
for multi temporal with multi
scale remote sensing data [9]. A
gray level co-occurrence metric
with different window size images
were used to find the four land
type of aerial data. Different
statistical
features
like
dissimilarity,
homogeneity,
angular second moment; entropy
etc were calculated to classify the
data [10]. A supervised pixelbased classification algorithm
was
used
by
implementing
Markov Random Field (MRF)
technique to distinguish the
agriculture land cover area
(cropland and grass land) [11]. It
gave the satisfactory results for
updating in GIS database for the
cropland and grassland region.
In this research, it was
tried to involve the technologies
like
(image
processing
and
remote sensing) in land cover
classification instead of manual
surveys.
This
research
was
conducted at district Bahawalpur

of Punjab (Pakistan) province,

located
at
292344N and
71411E. This research focused
at the land cover assessment,
management and classification
through remote sensed data. This
data was acquired by using a
device
named
Multispectral
Radiometer Crop Scan (MSR5). It
is a handheld device which
provides data equivalent to
Satellite Landsat5 TM (Thematic
Mapper). MSR5 provides an
alternative way of acquiring data
for
remote
sensing
where
satellite or radar datasets are not
easily available. Its output data
comprises five spectral bands
visible (blue, green, red), infrared
and microwave ranges from
450nm to 1750nm, whereas,
photographic data was acquired
by a digital camera.
This research will be based
on the analysis of 5 types of land
cover datasets, bare land, fertile
cultivated land, green pasture,
desert rangeland and Satluj river
land.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
The aim of this research
work was to develop a simple,
concise and robust method to
classify the five types of land
cover (LC) in an absolute natural
environment by using spectral
and statistical texture features.
To avoid complex laboratory
setup for the extraction of
morphological and color features,
we
used
statistical
textural
features for photographic data
and spectral features for remote
sensing data in this work.
Excellent results with an average
accuracy
of
91.332%
for

statistical texture features data

and 96.40% for spectral data
were achieved.
We have proposed a novel
spectra-statistical design frame
work for subjective land cover
(LC) classification. To accomplish
this
study
the
following
procedural
steps
of
image
preprocessing, feature extraction,
feature
selection,
feature
reduction and classification are
adopted, which are discussed in
the following sections.
PROPOSED METHODOLOGY
Figure 1, describes the
proposed
spectra-statistical
design frame work of this study.
2.1

2.

Figure 1. Proposed spectrastatistical design framework

2.2 STATISTICAL DATA AND IMAGE
ACQUISITION

Above
mentioned
five
different types of land cover (LC)
plots having 43560 square feet
area (1 acre) for each type.
Digital photographs of bare land,
desert
rangeland,
fertile
cultivated land, green pasture
and Sutlej river land are acquired

by digital camera of Company;

Nikon, model Coolplex having a
resolution of 10.1 megapixels.
The 15 colored images of each
type of land cover with the
dimensions of 42883216 pixels
and 24 bits depth having jpg
format are obtained. To increase
the dataset, 4 non overlapping
regions of interests (ROIs) of size
(512x512) on each image were
developed, in this way total

300(754) sub images data was

arranged for the analysis.
The photographic data was
acquired at the altitude 5 feet
from the ground surface. To avoid
the shadow effect the imaging
was performed at noon time
(12.00 pm to 2.00 pm) under
clear sky. At the time of data
acquisition the light intensity was
recorded by digital Luxmeter MS
6610, MATECH.

Table 1. Time and Light Intensity Information

Sr. No
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Land Type
Fertile
Bare
Desert
Green Pasture
Sutlej River

Time
1.00 pm
2.00 pm
1.30 pm
1.30 pm
1.00 pm

Light Intensity
34300 lux
34000 lux
34500 lux
35000 lux
34300 lux

Figure 2. Five Land Cover Images and Luxmeter

2.3
REMOTE
SENSING
DATA
sensitive cameras and sensors,
ACQUISITION
which are used to detect the
Remote
sensing
is
a radiations of each object and
science, which detect or identify record the numerical values of
an object or body without spectral data.
physical interaction. For this
Remote sensing can be
purpose, a device, which is defined as the collection of data
equipped with some sensors in the form of radiations about an
identify the object with its object taken from a particular
spectral parameters. For remote distance [12]. Remote sensing is
sensing different satellites, radar now playing a significant role in a
and space stations are working in wide range of environmental
space. These satellites have their disciplines such as geography,

geology,
zoology,
agriculture,
forestry,
botany,
meteorology,
oceanography
and
civil
engineering [13].
2.4 MULTISPECTRAL
(MSR5)

RADIOMETER

Multispectral Radiometer
(MSR5) made-up of CROPSCAN
Inc. (USA) for data collection.
MSR5 has the characteristic to
provide data similar to satellite
LANDSAT5 TM. It has five
different section of spectrum,
including visible (Blue, Green,
Red) near infrared and shortwave
infrared. MSR5 spectrum consists
of blue (450 to 520 nm), green
(520 to 600 nm), red (630 to 690
nm), near infrared (760 to 900)
and shortwave infrared (1550 to
1750 nm).
MSR5
CROPSCAN
has
been already used for the
assessment and measurement of
crops
weed
effect
[14]and
vegetation cover estimation and
diseases estimation [15-16]. For
remote sensing data, we acquired
50 MSR scans of each plot at 5
feet height of land cover surface.
Each MSR scan contain five wave
bands, three visible (Blue, Green,
Red) and two invisible infrared
and microwave. Five different
types of land cover[17] contain
total 250 spectral data instances.
PREPROCESSING
Each image has a vast
irrelevant area, so prior to
further
processing
relevant
portion of
the
image
was
extracted. The extracted relevant
portions of the images were
converted to gray scale images (8
2.5

bit) and were stored in bmp

format because the software
MaZda which was used to
calculate texture features only
works for this format [18]. By
using image converter software
we enhanced the contrast of gray
scale images.
FEATURE EXTRACTION
Transformation
of
an
image
in
to
its
statistical
attributes
is
called
feature
extraction, which were used for
the classification of an image.
There were many techniques for
feature extraction e.g. texture,
Gabor,
wavelet
transform,
boundary feature etc.
2.6

TEXTURE FEATURES
Statistical texture features
are categorized in to first order
which relates to the intensity of
the individual pixels, Second
order relates to the occurrence of
neighboring pixels. First order
statistical parameters are directly
based on histogram features of an
image
while
second
order
parameters derived from Gray
Level
Co-occurrence
Matrix
(GLCM). Here in this work total
229 statistical texture features
were calculated for each region
of interest (ROI) by using Mazda
software
version
4.6.
The
calculated
parameters
are
grouped as first order 9 statistical
parameters and 11 second order
(Haralick) statistical parameters
derived from (GLCM) in all four
directions (0, 45, 90 and 135)
up to 5 pixel distance 220
(1145) Haralick et.al [19]. It
means that each ROI had defined
by 229 textural features and
2.7

statistically
the
data
was
presented in 68700 (300229)
dimensional
features
vector
space.
It is worth to be mentioned
here that all of the 229 calculated
features
were
not
equally
important regarding for land
cover classification. Furthermore,
statistically a huge data was
required to have a reliable
discrimination and classification
results on the basis of so large
number of features, generally,
which was not available. So, it
was necessary that feature vector
space dimensionality should be
reduced by selecting the most
discriminate features, which had
the ability to discriminate and

classify the different types of

these land cover classes.

FEATURES SELECTION
Selection of the most
suitable
features
for
the
classification was a challenging
task.
We
had
used
three
supervised
feature
selection
methods Fisher Co-efficient (F),
Probability Of Error plus Average
Correlation
Co-efficient
(POE+ACC)
and
Mutual
Information
Co-efficient
(MI).
These methods were merged
together (F+PA+MI) to get the
most
discriminant
features.
Fisher
Co-efficient
(F)
[20]
mathematically is described as:
2.8

K2
F= 2 =
M

a=1

j=1

Pa P j LaL j / Pa M 2a

1 P2a

(1)

a=1

a=1

Where

Between-class variance,

within-class variance,

Pa

probability of feature

Ma

La

a ,

variance and mean value of feature

in the given

class.
Probability of Error plus Average Correlation Co-efficient (POE+ACC)
[21] is defined as:

POE ( f j ) =

number of misclassified samples

total number of samples

(2)

2= f j : Minimum j POE ( f j ) +|Correlation ( f 1 , f j )|

f

k1

n= f j : Minimum j POE ( f j ) +

(3)

1
. Correlation ( f a , f j )|
k1 a =0 |

(4)

Mutual Information Co-efficient (MI) [22] can be explained by the

given mathematical relation.

I ( F , C )= f c P ( F .C ) log 2

These approaches were

used for the selection of the most
discriminant set of features. This
software selects the 10 most
significant features and presents
these features in descending

P ( F . C)
P( F ) P (C )

(5)

order
according
to
their
significance. In this way total 30
(10 features by each mentioned
approach) were selected. As the
combined set of features gave
better classification results [23],

hence all the above mentioned

features were merged together,
in this way a set of 30 features

were
obtained
procedures.

for

further

Table 2. Feature Table (F+PA+MI) for ROI (512x512)

PA

MI

1S (0,3)
Correlation
2S (0,4)
Correlation
3S (0,3) Contrast
4S (0,4) Contrast
5S (0,5)
Correlation
6S(0,5) Contrast
7S (2,2)
Correlation
8S(0,3) Sum
Variance
9S(0,1) Inv Diff
Mom
10S(0,4) Sum
Variance

Perc.01%
S(1,1) Sum Variance
S(0,1) Ang. Sec
Mom Skewness
S(0,2) Sum Variance
S(5,5) Entropy
S(5,-5) Inv. Diff.
Mom
S(1,0) Sum. Average
S(1,0) Correlation
S(3,3) Entropy

FEATURES REDUCTION
Prior to classification the
features data was standardized to
reduce the effect of unwanted
variation within the data due to
outliers and other artifacts by
applying
the
following
mathematical relation:
2.9

K K
K= i

'
i

(6
)

S(0,5) Inv. Diff.

Mom
S(5,-5) Inv.Diff.
Mom
S(0,4) Inv. Diff.
Mom
S(4,-4) Inv.Diff.
Mom
S(0,3) Inv. Diff.
Mom
S(3,-3) Inv.Diff.
Mom
S(0,2) Inv. Diff.
Mom
S(2,2) Inv .Diff.
Mom
S(2,-2) Inv.Diff.
Mom
S(0,1) Inv. Diff.
Mom

Where:

K 'i

value of

i th feature and i = 1, 2,

is the standardized

n .

Ki

Original feature value

Mean feature value

Standard deviation

The
above
mentioned
approaches of feature selection

(F+PA+MI), only select the most

significant parameters, but did
not directly express the degree of
discrimination power. To find the
classification and data clustering,
the selected 30 features data was
deployed
to
non-linear
discrimination analysis (NDA)
available in B11 software [24], In
this technique there were 3
layers (input, first hidden, second
hidden and output layer) of
processing elements (neurons)
are
present.
NDA
can
be
described by logistic function. Its

value equal to 0.5 for =0 , and

dataset. Thus the ANN had Ny

output terminals

k
Ng
k=1

Y n=
Now here n = 1, 2, 3

( )=

1
1+ exp ( )

(7
)

If X was the feature vector

and it was the input to artificial
Neural Network (ANN). The input
terminals were equal to Nx.
Vector Y was the output of ANN,
whose dimension Ny was equal to
the number of types in the
M

j=1

Here k = 1, 2, 3

Ny

(9
)

Ng

Nx

h j=[W j 0 + W ji X i ]
i=1

varying from large

negative to large positive values.

Nh

gk = V k 0 + V kj h

it changes smoothly from 0 to 1

for

(8
)

U n 0 + U nk g

While j = 1, 2, 3

Nh

Supervised
learning
methods were based on input
patterns and correct classes they
belong to, {xi, di} where
i = 1, 2, 3 M .
For this purpose, the following
error function

Ny

1
E= ( d Y ( X i ; U ,V , W 2
2 i=1 n=1
While for MSR5 datasets
linear
discrimination
analysis
(LDA) gave the best results for
data clustering and analysis. Let
(k )

xi

denote the

i th

pattern in

(1
0)

(11
)

class i, where i = 1, 2, 3
and k = 1, 2, 3

Mk ,

N c . Define

the within-class scatter matrix

CW

as:

X i U
X
k
( i U k )t
.()
Nc

W =

Where

(12
)

Mk

1
.
M k=1 i=0
C

was the mean vector of class

define the between-class scatter matrix

CB

k . Similarly,

as

U
( k U )t
Nc

B=

Where

1
M .(U k U )
M k=1 k
C

objective of linear discriminant

was the mean

analysis (LDA) was to get a linear

vector of the pooled data. The

total

scatter

matrix

was

transform matrix.

the

X ki U
X
k
( i U )t
.()
Nc

t=

2.10

CLASSIFICATION

(13
)

Mk

1
.
M k=1 i=0
C

(14
)

For this work, we had

applied supervised classification
Artificial Neural Network (ANN).
ANN classifier was implemented
because of two reasons; firstly we
had supervised data (due to five
types of land) secondly according
to [24], ANN is a robust approach
for noisy and incomplete data
(such factors were always present
in dataset which was acquired in
natural
environment).
The
implemented classifier based on
feed forward approach with a
single hidden layer of sigmoidal
neurons. If x was the number of
deployed input features vectors

to ANN classifier then input

terminals were equal to Nx. The
output feature vector was y,
whose
dimensions
Ny
was
determined by the number of
classes to be classified. Thus the
ANN had Ny output terminals.

Figure 3. Model of implemented

ANN classifier

Nh

Y k =[V k 0+ V kj h j ]
j =1

Where k = 1, 2, 3

Ny

(15
)

and the outputs of the hidden layers are

given as:
Nx

h j=[W j 0 + W ji X i ]
i=1

We see here that j = 1, 2, 3

(16
)

Nh .

For
train
and
testing
purpose, the weight coefficients
are adjusted and observed how
much actual output value Y is
close is to the desired output d.
Supervised training techniques

are, based on input patterns and

correct categories they belongs
to {xi, di}, where i = 1, 2, 3

then following is the error

function which is reduced by

changing of weights v and w.

Ny

1
E= ( d Y ( X i ; V , W 2
2 i=1 n=1

(17
)

The architecture of proposed classifier is given for both types of

dataset in the Table 3:
Table 3. Architecture of implemented Classifier for Statistical Dataset

Input
Layers=5
Learning Rate
Eta=0.25

1st Hidden Layer=5

Back Propagation
Iteration=200000
Output Layers=5

2nd Hidden
Layer=2
Optimized Iteration
Limit=70

Statistical data classification architecture is given Table 4.

Table 4. Architecture of implemented Classifier for Spectral Dataset

Input
Layers=5
Learning Rate
Eta=0.20

1st Hidden Layer=5

Back Propagation
Iteration=200000
Output Layers=5

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

The proposed methodology
had been implemented by using
Mazda software versions 4.6 on
Intel(R) Core i3 processor 2.4
GHz
with
64-bit
operating
system.
3.

PHOTOGRAPHIC DATA
For photographic dataset,
first attempt for data clustering
and land cover classification was
verified on the basis of features
selected
by
individual
F,
POE+ACC and MI approaches on
3.1

the basis of ROIs

(128 128) ,

(64 64) ,

(256 256)

and

2ndHidden
Layer=2
Optimized Iteration
Limit=70

(512 512) . Now the selected

features were deployed for raw
data analysis (RDA), principle
component analysis (PCA), linear
discriminant analysis (LDA) and
non-linear discriminant analysis
(NDA) projection spaces to verify
the capability of data clustering.
Here, we received better data
clustering on the basis of NDA
approach as compare to the other
three
approaches.
It
was
observed that the discussed
above first three ROIs did not
give satisfactory results. These As
we have received less than 70%
accuracy on the basis of these
three
ROIs
which
is
not
acceptable whereas for ROI

(512 512)

we received 80%,

84% and 88.324% classification

accuracy on the bases of feature
selected by F, POE plus ACC and
MI respectively in projection
space of NDA. Because it has
been reported by number of
researcher
usually
the
classification is proportional to
the number of features deployed
[25], we also implemented the
same strategy to have better
results. For this purposes we
merged the features selected by
already
discussed
three
approaches (F+PA+MI). In this
way, a set of 30 features (10

features
of
each
selection
method)
was
received
by
combining
these
three
approaches on ROI (512 512) .
On deploying these 30 features to
RDA, PCA, LDA and NDA, These
datasets are deployed on the
above feature reduction by using
the k-fold (80-20) cross validation
method. It was observed that
nonlinear discriminant Analysis
(NDA) has given better analysis
of 100% as compared to others
three features reduction analysis
approaches. The results are
summarized in Table 5.

Table5. Statistical Data Analysis Table by using different features

Reduction approaches.

Statistical Data
Analysis K-(80-20)

RDA

PCA

LDA

NDA

1-Fold

92.5%

92.50%

97.50%

100%

2-Fold

88.75%

87.92%

96.25%

100%

3-Fold

90%

89.17%

98.75%

100%

4-Fold

88.75%

87.50%

96.67%

100%

5-Fold

90.42%

90.42%

99.17%

100%

Average Accuracy

90.08%

The
Statistical
data
comparison analysis of RDA, PCA,
LDA and NDA is presented in
Figure 5. From this Figure, it is
clear that the result NDA leads
for best classification result of
100% accuracy as compared to
remaining three approaches RDA,

89.502
97.668
100%
%
%
PCA
and
LDA.
Figure
5
represents the Photographic data
clustering for five input classes in
NDA projection space

Figure 5. Digital Photographic

Data Analysis Result.

105.00%
100.00%
95.00%
90.00%
85.00%
80.00%
RDA

PCA

LDA

NDA

Non Linear discriminant

Analysis (NDA) graph shows the
properly clustered data in to its

five appropriate classes. Data

Cluster graph is shown below
Figure 6.

Figure 6. Statistical data clustering in NDA.

By the implementation of
ANN: n class training and testing,
available in B11 integrated with
software Mazda was performed to
verify the validity of classifier. For
this purpose a cross validation Kfold (80-20) method was used.
For training purpose 48 data
instances of each size (512512)
from land cover type was used.
For each iteration, total 240 data
instances out of 300 were used
for train the dataset. Testing is
performed on 60 data instances
(12 data instances from each land
cover type). We received an

average accuracy of 100% when

the classifier was trained under
the architecture setting already
discussed in Table 3 and an
average classification accuracy of
91.334% was obtained when
classifier
was
tested
for
photographic data. So, five types
of land cover data were clustered
properly by using nonlinear
discriminant
analysis
(NDA).
Statistical texture train, test,
properly classified along with
misclassified data is represented
in Table 6.

Table 6. Classification Table for Image dataset (Statistical data) by

using Artificial Neural Network (ANN)

Statistica
l Data
Iteration
(80-20)

Trainin
g Data

Train
Accurac
y%

Test
Data

Miscla
ssified
Data

Classifica
tion %

1-Fold

240

100%

60

5/60

91.67%

2-Fold

240

100%

60

6/60

90%

3-Fold

240

100%

60

6/50

90%

4-Fold

240

100%

60

3/50

95%

5-Fold

240

100%

60

6/50

90%

Average Training classification: 100%

Average Testing Classification: 91.334%
The
performance
of
classifier in testing phase for
different classes is summarized in
confusion Table 7.

Total 300 data instances of

photographic data (60 data
instance of each land) are shown
in appropriate five different
classes.
Table 7. Confusion Table of Statistical Data Classification by using
ANN: n class Method

Fertil
e
Land

Green
Pastur
e

Desert
Rangel
and

Bare
Land

Sutlej
River
Land

Total

51

60

59

60

48

60

Bare Land

57

60

Sutlej
River
Land

55

60

Type
Fertile
Land
Green
Pasture
Desert
Rangelan
d

Here confusion Table for photographic data is presented by

using ANN: n class Method of five different land cover types by
graphical way in Figure 7.

Confusion Table for Statistical Test Data Classification Graph

70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

Fertile Land
Green Pasture
Desert RangeLand
Bare Land
Satluj river Land

Figure 7. Confusion Table of Statistical Data Classification Graph.

3.2

SPECTRAL DATA

As
we
have
already
mentioned that a scene was
completely explored on the basis
of five spectral bands (Blue.
Green,
Red),
infrared
and
microwave
acquired
by
MSR5.The whole data (250 scans)
acquired by MSR5 were deployed
to RDA, PCA, LDA and NDA to
verify the validity of data
clustering for the classification.
We received RDA 98.7%, PCA
98.4%, LDA 99.5% and NDA
99.4% data clustering accuracy. It
is clear that we received the best
clustering accuracy by LDA
approach as shown in Figure 8.
For training and testing ANN
classifier, the same K-fold (80-20)
cross validation method was also
used for Spectral data analysis. A

data set of 200 scans of five

spectral parameters (Blue. Green,
Red), infrared and microwave
was deployed to ANN: n class
training
purpose
with
architecture
settings
as
mentioned in Table4. The output
training results for spectral data
are summarized in Table8 and are
represented graphically in Figure
6. Under the same architecture
setting of Table3, ANN classifier
was tested by deploying 50
disjoints data instances (10 data
instances of each land cover type)
of the selected five spectral
features.
Artificial
Neural
Network
(ANN)
classifier
revealed very promising results
during this testing purpose. The
results
of
data
clustering,
training
and
testing
are
presented in Table 8 with detail.

Table 8. Spectral Data clustering by different features Reduction

techniques

Spectral Data
Analysis (80-20)

RDA

PCA

LDA

NDA

1-Fold

99%

97.5%

99.5%

100%

2-Fold

99%

99%

100%

99%

3-Fold

98.5%

98.5%

100%

100%

4-Fold

98.5%

98.5%

99%

99%

5-Fold

98.5%

98.5%

99%

99%

Average Accuracy

98.7%

98.4%

99.5%

99.4%

Spectral data comparison

analysis of RDA, PCA, LDA and
NDA is shown in Table5; this
shows that LDA outperforms and
gives
the
99.5%
clustering
accuracy. For Feature reduction
techniques, data analysis graph
of MSR5 is shown in Figure 8.

Cluster graph is shown in Figure

9.

99.60%
99.40%
99.20%
99.00%

Figure 9. MSR5 Data Clustered

Result for LDA

98.80%
98.60%
98.40%
98.20%
98.00%
97.80%
RDA PCA LDA NDA

Figure 8. MSR5 Dataset

analysis Results.
Linear
discriminant
Analysis (LDA) graph shows the
properly clustered data in to its
five
appropriate
classes
as
compared to employed other
reduction
techniques.
Data

We received an average
accuracy of 100% when the
classifier was trained under the
architecture
setting
already
discussed in Table 4 and an
average classification accuracy of
96.40% was obtained when
classifier was tested for MSR5
data. So, five types of land cover
data were clustered properly by
using linear discriminant analysis
(LDA). MSR5 train, test, properly
classified along with misclassified
data is represented in Table 9.

Table 9. MSR5 Dataset Classification (Testing Data (80-20 Fold)

Spectral
Data
Iteration
(80-20)

Traini
ng
Data

Train
Accur
acy

Test
Dat
a

Misclassi
fied Data

Classificat
ion%

1-Fold

200

100%

50

6/50

88%

2-Fold

200

100%

50

2/50

96%

3-Fold

200

100%

50

0/50

100%

4-Fold

200

100%

50

1/50

98%

5-Fold

200

100%

50

0/50

100%

Average Accuracy:

88+96+100+98+100 = 96.40%

Confusion Table of spectral

data classification by using ANN:
n class Method of five different

types land is shown in given

Table10.

Table 10. Confusion Table of Spectral Data Classification by using

ANN: n class Method

Type

Ferti
le
Land

Desert
Rangel
and

Bare
Land

Sutlej
River
Land

Tot
al

47

Gree
n
Pastu
re
1

Fertile
Land
Green
Pasture
Desert
Rangeland
Bare Land
Sutlej River
Land

50

50

50

48

50

0
0

0
0

2
1

48
1

0
48

50
50

Now confusion Table for

MSR5 data is presented by using
ANN: n class Method of five

different types land is shown in

given Figure 10.

Spectral Test Data classification

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

Fertile Land
Green Pasture
Desert RangeLand
Bare Land
Satluj river Land

Figure 10. Confusion Chart of Spectral Data Classification.

When we compare spectral texture 91.334%. Comparison
and
statistical
classification graph
between
MSR5
and
accuracy it is observed that photographic data is shown
spectral accuracy result is better Figure 11.
96.40% as compared to statistical
Land Classification Graph Between Spectral and Statistical Data
105
100
95
90
85

Figure 11. Land classification Results between spectral and

statistical data.
Reason
behind
this
classification accuracy difference
is
that
statistical
analysis
outperformed on fine texture
[26]. In this research, the
photographic data was taken at 5
feet height so the area under
these photographs were not
equally covered and distributed,
beside this ROIs also play an
important role for classification.

As ROIs size increased then

efficiency was also observed
better. it was the fact that if
photographs were taken on more
height and area under the region
was maximum covered then
classification accuracy could be
improved.
Secondly
it
was
observed that almost (5% to 6%)
better classification results were
obtained by the remote sensing

MSR5 data as compared to

photographic data (400nm to
700nm) because MSR5 data
comprises visible (400nm to
700nm) and invisible infrared and
microwave (790nm to 1750nm)
wavelength. Data sampling with
normalization
and
data
standardization
and
classifier
may also impact on results for
better
classification.
By
implementing these sophisticated
quantitative parameters rather
than
conventional
qualitative
parameters we can accurately
classify [27] the different types of
land cover.
CONCLUSION
In this work five types of land
cover were classified on the basis
of quantitative parameters rather
than
conventional
qualitative
parameters and an average
accuracy of 96.40% for spectral
data and 91.334% for statistical
texture data was achieved. It was
difficult task that, up to what
extent these classes may be
classified into their appropriate
classes and it was also a
verification of intra and inter
classification pattern features of
these five land cover types. Five
Spectral
and
30
statistical
textural features were used for
the analysis of land cover data
which made our approach more
reliable than other approaches in
which morphological, Color and
other shape features were used.
Artificial neural network (ANN)
was
implemented
very
successfully for the classification
of five different types of land
cover, Fertile, Green pasture,
Desert Rangeland, Bare and
4.

Sutlej river land. In future we

may enhance this research for
considering
environmental
factors like rain, usage of
fertilizers; dry weather effects
and land crop growth and
assessment etc.
REFERENCES
[1] WalterShea E., Blad B., Hays
C., Mesarch M., Deering D. and
Middleton
E.,
Biophysical
properties affecting vegetative
canopy reflectance and absorbed
photosynthetically
active
radiation at the FIFE site, Journal
of
Geophysical
Research:
Atmospheres., 1992; 97:1892518934.
[2] Rundquist B. C. Fine-scale
spatial and temporal variation in
the relationship between spectral
reflectance
and
a
prairie
vegetation canopy, PhD Thesis,
Kansas State University, U.S.A.,
2000.
[3] Foody G. M., Status of land
cover
classification
accuracy
assessment, Remote sensing of
environment., 2002; 80(1): 185201.
[4] Parihar J. S. and Oza M. P.,
FASAL: An integrated approach
for
crop
assessment
and
production
forecasting,
Proceedings
of
the
SPIE,
Agricultural
and
hydrology
applications.,
2006:
6411,
641101-641113.
[5] Pakistan Demographic Survey,
Province Census Report of Sindh,
Federal Bureau of Statistics,
Statistics Division, Government of
Pakistan, Islamabad, 2000.
[6] Kureshy K. U., In Geography
of
Pakistan,
National
Book

services, Lahore, 1995.

[7] Blaschke T., Lang S., Lorup E.,
Strobl J. and Zeil P., Objectoriented image processing in an
integrated GIS/remote sensing
environment and perspectives for
environmental
applications,
Environmental information for
planning, politics and the public.,
In Cremers A. and Greve K., eds.,
Environmental information for
planning, politics and the public,
Metropolis-Verlag,
Marburg,
2000; 2: 555-570.
[8] Albert L., Rottensteiner F. and
Heipke
C.,
A
two-layer
Conditional Random Field model
for simultaneous classification of
land cover and land use, ISPRSInternational Archives of the
Photogrammetry,
Remote
Sensing and Spatial Information
Sciences., 2014;3: 17-24.
[9] Hoberg T., Rottensteiner F.
and Heipke C., Context models
for CRF-based classification of
multitemporal remote sensing
data,
ISPRS
Annals
of
Photogrammetry Remote Sensing
and
Spatial
Information
Sciences., 2012; 1(7):128-134.
[10] Caridade C., Maral A.R. and
Mendona T. The use of texture
for image classification of black &
white
air
photographs.
International Journal of Remote
Sensing., 2008; 29(2): 593-607.
[11] Helmholz P., Rottensteiner F.
and Heipke C., Semi-automatic
verification of cropland and
grassland
using
very
high
resolution
mono-temporal
satellite images, ISPRS Journal of
Photogrammetry and Remote
Sensing,, 2014; 97: 204-218.
[12] Davies E.R., Machine vision:

theory
algorithms
practicalities,1st. Edn., Elsevier,
2004.
[13] Panigrahy S., Upadhyay G.,
Ray S. S. and Parihar J.S.,
Mapping of cropping system for
the Indo-Gangetic plain using
multi-date SPOT NDVI-VGT data,
Journal of the Indian Society of
Remote Sensing., 2010; 38(4):
627-632.
[14] Tsirogiannis I., Katsoulas N.,
Savvas D., Karras G. and Kittas
C.,
Relationships
between
Reflectance and Water Status in a
Greenhouse Rocket (Eruca sativa
Mill.)
Cultivation,
European
journal of horticultural science.,
2013; 78(6): 275-282.
[15] Chang J., Clay S.A., Clay D.E.
and Dalsted K., Detecting weedfree and weed-infested areas of a
soybean field using near-infrared
spectral data, Weed Science.,
2002; 52(4): 642-648.
[16] Vrindts E., Reyniers M.,
Darius P., Gilot M., Sadaoui Y.,
Frankinet M., Hanquet B. and
Destain M.F., Analysis of soil and
crop properties for precision
agriculture for winter wheat,
Biosystems engineering., 2003;
85(2): 141-152.
[17] Szczypiski P.M., Strzelecki
M., Materka A. and Klepaczko A.,
MaZdaA software package for
image texture analysis, Computer
methods
and
programs
in
biomedicine., 2009; 94(1): 66-76.
[18] Gonzalez R. C., Woods R. E.
and Eddins S. L., Digital image
processing
using
MATLAB.
Pearson Education India, 2004.
[19] Haralick R. M., Shanmugam
K. and Dinstein I.H., Textural
features for image classification.,
IEEE Transactions on Systems,

Man and Cybernetics., 1973; 6 :

610-621.
[20]
Schrmann
J.,
Pattern
classification: A unified view of
statistical and neural approaches,
Wiley Online Library, 1996.
[21] Dash M. and Liu H., Feature
selection
for
classification,
Intelligent data analysis., 1997);
1(3): 131-156.
[22] Tourassi G. D., Frederick E.
D., Markey M. K. and Floyd Jr. C.
E., Application of the mutual
information criterion for feature
selection
in
computer-aided
diagnosis,
Medical
Physics.,
2001; 28(12): 2394-2402.
[23] Ojala T., Pietikinen M. and
Harwood D., A comparative study
of
texture
measures
with
classification based on featured
distributions,
Pattern
recognition., 1996; 29(1): 51-59.
[24] Materka A., Strzelecki M.,
Lerski R. and Schad L., Toward
automatic feature selection of
texture test objects for magnetic
resonance
imaging,
Pattern

Recognition Conference; Porto ,

2000: 11-16.
[25] Park S. C., Pu J. and Zheng
B., Improving performance of
computer-aided detection scheme
by combining results from two
machine
learning
classifiers,
Academic
radiology.,
2009;
16(3): 266-274.
[26]
Zapotoczny
P.,
Discrimination of wheat grain
varieties using image analysis
and neural networks, Part I.
Single kernel texture, Journal of
Cereal Science., 2011; 54(1): 6068.
[27] Alajlan N., Bazi Y., Melgani F.
and Yager R. R., Fusion of
supervised
and
unsupervised
learning
for
improved
classification of hyperspectral
images, Information Sciences.,
2012; 217: 39-55.