 |
OO GIS at Ispra
Project Vision: To establish at Ispra a permanent centre of expertise
in object-oriented GIS technologies based around an in-house developed
and maintained OO-GIS research application based on a commercial OO-GIS
product. |
High-Level Use Case:
Architecture of Data Processing
The purpose of the application is land re-classification
and change detection. (Note that this is just the technical
procedure, not the requirements for the project as a whole.)
Input data are:
-
previous classified map as polygons covering
100% of area where each polygon is classified (as an attribute code) as
one of the 40 CORINE "Class 3" classifications and there further
attributes on each polygon describing mixed class possibilitites, errors
etc.
-
one or more new images (raster) covering the
same area which are expected to be slightly misregistered with respect
to both the vector data and each other.
The sequence of suggested actions follows. The
complete actions are difficult and require complex software configurations,
so the complete sequence is not a realistic target (see current
task list and software development plan).
-
Take raster images and perform segmentation to
find shapes (will be determined purely by the spectral data in the raster
image, no other data to be used).
-
Detect if new image accurately (to some level
of probability) matches previous polygon shape: produce a yes/no
answer for each polygon.
-
For matching shapes, perform classification and
detect if class is same or changed: yes/no for each polygon.
-
If shape is same, but classification has probably
changed (to some set level of probability), re-set classification, if probability
is uncertain, alert the user or produce report or some similar action.
-
If shape was different, perform re-segmentation
on the area bounded by the affected polygons and alert the user.
-
If shape was different, after re-segmentation,
generalise result to standard CORINE generalisation standard.
-
If shape was different, reclassify re-segmented
and generalised polygons.
-
Finally, write out result polygon dataset in
same format and with same types of attributes as input polygon dataset,
and print change report with statistics and confidence levels.
The above software does not include:
-
calibration experiments to find suitable algorithm
set points for each of the 4 algorithms so that an interesting and believable
demonstration is achived.
-
the academic issue of doing a piece of research
for publication. That is extra work which requires both more software
development and comparison between different candidates for each of the
4 algorithm types: shape detection, classification, segmentation and generalisation
algorithms.
Unavoidable Research Issues
Some of these processes can potentially be performed
by algorithms developed for other purposes, but even these may need adapting
and will certainly need configuring and tuning. Even if all the
steps were established algorithms, available in a commercial GIS product,
putting them together and tuning parameters to make them work together
would be a significant piece of work.
The initial segmentation step on the input
raster images is a significant piece of work in itself. It requires a user-level
view of what the most important spectral distinctions are, which must be
derived from a spectral class to land-cover class mapping. It requires
thresholds and segmentation algorithms, minimum area limits etc. To cope
with misregistration, Smits' research work on textures will probably have
to be used.
Yes/no detection of changed polygon shape
from a raster image is a complex procedure in itself requiring many of
the algorithms listed for later steps. Detection of encroachments requires
a different algorithm from detecting enlargements. If the encoachment is
smaller than the minimum size of polygon allowed for the specific data
product (CORINE specifies a minimum 25ha), then the adjacent polygon must
be found (easy for topologically connected polygons) and modified - if
it's class is compatible. For enlargements it is even trickier: the affected
adjacent polygon may then be too small and need to be merged with a third
polygon.
The classification task can take into account only the spectral class
of the segmented area and the previous polygon classification, or it can
take adjacent polygons into account to determine the "local landscape type"
which would change the prior probablitities for classification.
The process "For matching shapes, perform
classification" is very similar to algorithms developed for the
CROPINS configuration of IGIS and the CLEVER
Mapping project and are incorporated into IGIS 3.1 .
Segmentation of a pure raster field is a moderately
standard technique, but not when bounded by vector polygons (which
must not be changed) as here.
Even generic algorithm design is emphatically
not a solved problem. There are significant
unresolved issues, especially where an operational system is eventually
envisaged.
Version 2 of this document. (Versions start at 0.)
Go to Project
Home Page
Updated 12 August 1998