Redirigiendo al acceso original de articulo en 23 segundos...
ARTÍCULO
TITULO

A Fully Automatic, Interpretable and Adaptive Machine Learning Approach to Map Burned Area from Remote Sensing

Daniela Stroppiana    
Gloria Bordogna    
Matteo Sali    
Mirco Boschetti    
Giovanna Sona and Pietro Alessandro Brivio    

Resumen

The paper proposes a fully automatic algorithm approach to map burned areas from remote sensing characterized by human interpretable mapping criteria and explainable results. This approach is partially knowledge-driven and partially data-driven. It exploits active fire points to train the fusion function of factors deemed influential in determining the evidence of burned conditions from reflectance values of multispectral Sentinel-2 (S2) data. The fusion function is used to compute a map of seeds (burned pixels) that are adaptively expanded by applying a Region Growing (RG) algorithm to generate the final burned area map. The fusion function is an Ordered Weighted Averaging (OWA) operator, learnt through the application of a machine learning (ML) algorithm from a set of highly reliable fire points. Its semantics are characterized by two measures, the degrees of pessimism/optimism and democracy/monarchy. The former allows the prediction of the results of the fusion as affected by more false positives (commission errors) than false negatives (omission errors) in the case of pessimism, or vice versa; the latter foresees if there are only a few highly influential factors or many low influential ones that determine the result. The prediction on the degree of pessimism/optimism allows the expansion of the seeds to be appropriately tuned by selecting the most suited growing layer for the RG algorithm thus adapting the algorithm to the context. The paper illustrates the application of the automatic method in four study areas in southern Europe to map burned areas for the 2017 fire season. Thematic accuracy at each site was assessed by comparison to reference perimeters to prove the adaptability of the approach to the context; estimated average accuracy metrics are omission error = 0.057, commission error = 0.068, Dice coefficient = 0.94 and relative bias = 0.0046.

 Artículos similares