Comparative evaluation of hyperspectral anomaly detectors in different types of background

Dirk Borghys; Ingebjorg Kåsen; Veronique Achard; Christiaan Perneel

doi:10.1117/12.920387

24 May 2012 Comparative evaluation of hyperspectral anomaly detectors in different types of background

Dirk Borghys, Ingebjorg Kåsen, Veronique Achard, Christiaan Perneel

Proceedings Volume 8390, Algorithms and Technologies for Multispectral, Hyperspectral, and Ultraspectral Imagery XVIII; 83902J (2012) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.920387
Event: SPIE Defense, Security, and Sensing, 2012, Baltimore, Maryland, United States

Abstract

Anomaly detection (AD) in hyperspectral data has received a lot of attention for various applications. The aim of anomaly detection is to detect pixels in the hyperspectral data cube whose spectra differ significantly from the background spectra. Many anomaly detectors have been proposed in literature. They differ by the way the background is characterized and by the method used for determining the difference between the current pixel and the background. The most well-known anomaly detector is the RX detector that calculates the Mahalanobis distance between the pixel under test (PUT) and the background. Global RX characterizes the background of the complete scene by a single multi-variate normal distribution. In many cases this model is not appropriate for describing the background. For that reason a variety of other anomaly detection methods have been developed. This paper examines three classes of anomaly detectors: sub-space methods, local methods and segmentation-based methods. Representative examples of each class are chosen and applied on a set of hyperspectral data with different backgrounds. The results are evaluated and compared.

Citation Download Citation

Dirk Borghys, Ingebjorg Kåsen, Veronique Achard, and Christiaan Perneel "Comparative evaluation of hyperspectral anomaly detectors in different types of background", Proc. SPIE 8390, Algorithms and Technologies for Multispectral, Hyperspectral, and Ultraspectral Imagery XVIII, 83902J (24 May 2012); https://doi.org/10.1117/12.920387

ACCESS THE FULL ARTICLE

INSTITUTIONAL
Select your institution to access the SPIE Digital Library.

SELECT YOUR INSTITUTION

PERSONAL
Sign in with your SPIE account to access your personal subscriptions or to use specific features such as save to my library, sign up for alerts, save searches, etc.

PERSONAL SIGN IN

No SPIE Account? Create one

PURCHASE THIS CONTENT

SUBSCRIBE TO DIGITAL LIBRARY

50 downloads per 1-year subscription

Members: $195

Non-members: $335 ADD TO CART

25 downloads per 1 - year subscription

Members: $145

Non-members: $250 ADD TO CART

PURCHASE SINGLE ARTICLE

Includes PDF, HTML & Video, when available