Evaluation of Multi-Sensor Satellite Data Accuracy for LU/LC Classification: Insights from Cartosat-1 and Liss-Iv Imagery In 2021

Document Type : Original Research

Authors
1 Research Scientist, Department of Space, National Remote Sensing Centre, Indian Space Research Organisation, Regional Remote Sensing Centre, North, New Delhi-110049.
2 Professor, Dept of Soil and Water Engineering, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, Punjab, India
3 Scientist SG, Punjab Remote Sensing Centre, Ludhiana, Punjab, India
Abstract
Aim: Due to increasing flaws in digital satellite images, the classification of land use and land cover (LU/LC) must be done accurately. It is important to assess the accuracy of Cartosat-1 and LISS-IV data, concentrating on how well-suited these data sets were for mapping and tracking land use and cover. The purpose of the study was to evaluate how well these datasets distinguished between various land cover categories.

Method: Supervised classification is crucial for accurate mapping and monitoring land cover and land use dynamics. It uses known samples to train classification algorithms, enabling detailed analysis and decision-making, and distinguishing subtle spectral variations. A total of 200 points were randomly selected in the study area using stratified random selection methodology for accuracy assessment which was verified using Google earth.

Findings: The results of study show that the overall accuracy for LU/LC classification of Cartosat-1 and LISS-IV for the year 2021 was obtained as 92% and 88.50% respectively with corresponding kappa coefficient values as 0.90 and 0.86 respectively which proves that data from Cartosat-1 is more accurate as compared to LISS-IV for LU/LC classification. It was also found that LU/LC classes belongs to both classified data of Cartosat-1 and LISS-IV data showed variability in their areas. Due to the high spatial resolution of Cartosat-1 data LULC classes edge to edge classification results have been obtained. Different feature have been purely identified and classified.

Conclusion: Cartosat-1 dataset is better than LISS-IV dataset for deailed LU/LC classification due to its high spatial resolution.
Keywords

Subjects


1.Tilahun A, Teferie B. Accuracy assessment of land use land cover classification using Google Earth. American. J. Environ. Prot. 2015; 4(4): 193-198. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajep.20150404.14
2.Topaloglu RH, Sertel E, Musaoglu N. Assessment of classification accuracies of sentinel-2 and landsat-8 data for land cover/use mapping. ISPRS Achieves. 2016; 41.
3.Rawat JS, Biswas V, Kumar M. Changes in land use/cover using geospatial techniques: A case study of Ramnagar town area, district Nainital, Uttarakhand, India. Egypt. J. Remote Sens. Space Sci. 2013; 16(1): 111-117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrs.2013.04.002
4.Yadav PK, Kapoor M, Sarma K. Land use land cover mapping, change detection and conflict analysis of Nagzira-Navegaon Corridor, Central India using geospatial technology. Int. J. Remote Sen. GIS. 2012; 1(2): 90-98.
5.Mondal I, Thakur S, Ghosh P, De TK, Bandyopadhyay J. Land use/land cover modeling of Sagar Island, India using remote sensing and GIS techniques. In Emerging technologies in data mining and information security. 2019; (pp. 771-785). Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-1951-8_69
6.Rujoiu-Mare MR, Mihai BA. Mapping land cover using remote sensing data and GIS techniques: A case study of Prahova Subcarpathians. Procedia. Environ. Sci. 2016; 32: 244-255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proenv.2016.03.029
7.Rwanga SS, Ndambuki, JM. Accuracy assessment of land use/land cover classification using remote sensing and GIS. Int. J. Geosci. 2017; 8(4): 611. https://doi.org/10.4236/ijg.2017.84033
8.Suresh R. Soil and Water Conservation Engineering. Standard Publishers Distributors. 2015; New Delhi, India.
9.Weslati, O, Bouaziz S, Serbaji MM. Mapping and monitoring land use and land cover changes in Mellegue watershed using remote sensing and GIS. Arabian. J. Geosci. 2020; 13(14): 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-020-05664-5
10.Shalaby A, Tateishi R. Remote sensing and GIS for mapping and monitoring land cover and land-use changes in the Northwestern coastal zone of Egypt. App. Geogr. 2007; 27(1): 28-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2006.09.004
11.Mishra PK, Rai A, Rai SC. Land use and land cover change detection using geospatial techniques in the Sikkim Himalaya, India. Egyptian. J. Remote Sen. Space. Sci. 2020; 23(2): 133-143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrs.2019.02.001
12.Chowdary VM, Ramakrishnan D, Srivastava YK, Chandran V, Jeyaram A. Integrated water resource development plan for sustainable management of Mayurakshi watershed, India using remote sensing and GIS. Water. Resour. Manage. 2009; 23(8): 1581-1602. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-008-9342-9
13.Pradeep C, Bharadwaj AK, Thirumalaivasan D. Land use/land cover change detection: a case study of Usilampatti Block, Madurai District, Tamil Nadu. Int. J. Geomat. Geosci. 2014; 4(4): 600.
14.Congalton RG. A review of assessing the accuracy of classifications of remotely sensed data. Remote. Sen. Environ. 1991; 37(1): 35-46. https://doi.org/10.1016/0034-4257(91)90048-B
15.Liu C, Frazier P, Kumar L. Comparative assessment of the measures of thematic classification accuracy. Remote. Sen. Environ. 2007; 107(4): 606-616. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2006.10.010
16.Digra A, Kaushal A, Loshali DC, Kaur S, Bhavsar, D. et al. (2022. Temporal Land-Use/Land-Cover Change Analysis in Kotla Sub-Watershed of Rupnagar District (Punjab) Using Remote Sensing and GIS. J. Indian. Soc. Remote. Sens. 50, 1371–1391). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12524-022-01501-2
17.Thapa RB, Murayama Y. Urban mapping, accuracy, & image classification: A comparison of multiple approaches in Tsukuba City, Japan. Appl. Geogr. 2009; 29(1): 135-144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2008.08.001
18.Stehman SV. Estimating area from an accuracy assessment error matrix. Remote. Sen. Environ. 2013; 132: 202-211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2013.01.016
19.Digra A, Kaushal A. Land Use and Land Cover Change Analysis using Remote Sensing and GIS Techniques. Biol. Forum. Int. J. 2021; 13(3b): 134-138.
20.Digra A, Nijjar CS, Setia R, Gupta SK, Pateriya B. Mapping Orchards and Crops Using Sentinel-2 Imagery. In Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in Satellite Data Processing and Services: Proceedings of the International Conference on Small Satellites, ICSS 2022; pp. 117-122. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-7698-8_13
21.Ghomeshion M, Vali A A, Ranjbar Fordoei A, Mousavi S H. Investigating the effect of land cover on dust spatial distribution in Southern Khuzestan province. ECOPERSIA 2022; 10 (3) :179-189. https://ecopersia.modares.ac.ir/article-24-57777-en.html
22.Najafi Kalyani N, Ranjbar-Fordoei A, Fatemeh P, Musavi H. Prediction of Soil Hydrological Responses under Land Use/Cover Changes using Markov Chains in Jiroft Watershed, Iran. ECOPERSIA 2022; 10 (1) :47-59. https://ecopersia.modares.ac.ir/article-24-53522-en.html
23.Getu Engida T, Nigussie T A, Aneseyee A B, Barnabas J. Land use/land cover change impact on hydrological process in the Upper Baro Basin, Ethiopia. Appl. Environ. Soil. Sci. 2021; 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/6617541