Table 1 Performance comparison of Xiamen, China
Method | Precision | Urban | water | Vegetation | Overall accuracy | Kappa |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MRF-ARF | PA | 97.87% | 85.20% | 87.47% | 93.61% | 0.8717 |
UA | 92.46% | 87.96% | 96.40% | |||
MRF-RF | PA | 58.48% | 88.81% | 62.45% | 61.00% | 0.4209 |
UA | 97.99% | 8.48% | 84.01% | |||
ATWT-EMD | PA | 66.48% | 88.65% | 60.02% | 64.90% | 0.3549 |
UA | 74.38% | 29.93% | 60.98% | |||
SAR only | PA | 95.55% | 37.16% | 38.87% | 72.75% | 0.3938 |
UA | 70.52% | 99.76% | 81.07% | |||
Optical only | PA | 59.25% | 93.26% | 77.50% | 67.15% | 0.4444 |
UA | 96.97% | 25.77% | 56.05% |