Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Applying Target Decomposition Algorithms on the Detection of Man Made Targets Using Polarimetric SAR University of British Columbia September, 2007 Flavio.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Applying Target Decomposition Algorithms on the Detection of Man Made Targets Using Polarimetric SAR University of British Columbia September, 2007 Flavio."— Presentation transcript:

1 Applying Target Decomposition Algorithms on the Detection of Man Made Targets Using Polarimetric SAR University of British Columbia September, 2007 Flavio Wasniewski*, Ian Cumming

2 Objectives 1. Review the Detection of Crashed Airplanes (DCA) methodology applied by Lukowski et. al. 2. Test this methodology with a more diverse set of target clutters and types; 3. Compare its performance with available target detection algorithms; 4. Develop improvements to the methodology in order to give good detection performance to a range of target and clutter types. 2

3 Detection of Man Made Targets with Radar Polarimetry 3  High target-to-clutter ratio (not necessarily higher than in natural targets)  Dihedral scattering expected (phase information can be explored)  Polarimetric decompositions are among the most promising algorithms  Most civilian operational applications focus in ship detection

4 Detection of Crashed Airplanes (DCA) Source: Lukowski et. al., CJRS, 2004 4  Promising in-land application  Tested on airplanes and low vegetation clutter  Tail and wings usually remain intact and provide dihedrals  Can it be applied to all discrete man made targets? (will dihedrals always be present?)

5 5 Methodology 1 (DCA)  The cross symbol is a logical “and” combining the 3 results.

6 6 Methodology 2

7 7 Methodology 3

8 8 Methodology 4

9 Algorithms (1/5) – Polarimetric Whitening Filter 9  Bright pixels represent strong radar returns, but targets are obscured;  PWF reduces speckle (σ/µ) without affecting the resolution;  Target-to-clutter ratio is improved

10 10 Algorithms (2/5) – Even Bounce Analysis  Explores the 180° phase shift between HH and VV

11 11 Algorithms (3/5) – Cameron Decomposition  Classifies the target according to the maximum symmetric component in one of six elemental scatterers. TargetSMZ Trihedral1 Dihedral Dipole0 Cylinder0.5 Narrow Diplane -0.5 Quarter Wave i Source: Cameron, 1996

12 12 Algorithms (4/5) – Freeman-Durden Decomposition Decomposition of backscatter into three basic scattering mechanisms:  Volume scattering: canopy scatter from a cloud of randomly oriented dipoles  Double-bounce: scattering from a dihedral  Surface scattering: Single bounce from a moderately rough surface Source: Freeman et. al.

13 13 Algorithms (5/5) – Coherence Test  Detects coherent targets based on the degree of coherence and target-to-clutter ratio. Degree of coherence   and  are the Pauli components

14 Closing (dilation + erosion) Clustering Erasing 1 and 2-pixel detections Morphological processing 14

15 Experiments: data sets used (1) Gagetown dataset 15

16 Experiments: data sets used (2) Westham Island dataset 16

17 17 Results – Target 21 (House Among Trees) CV-580 dataTarget and clutter (Ikonos image)

18 18 Results – Target 21 – Methodology 1 PWF and Even Bounce

19 19 Results – Target 21 – Methodology 1 Cameron combined to PWF and Even Bounce

20 20 Results – Target 21 – Methodology 2

21 21 Results – Target 21 – Methodology 3 Detection map after morphology

22 22 Results – Target 21 – Methodology 4 Cameron + PWF + Even Bounce + Coherence TestDetection map

23 23 Results – Target 2 (Plow)

24 24 Results – Target 2 – Methodology 1 - Same detection results were achieved by Methodologies 2 and 4

25 25 Results – Target 5 (Horizontal cylinders)  Man made target with no dihedral behaviour  No detections

26 26 Results – Target 7 (House)

27 27 Results – Target 20 (Crashed Plane in Grass) Corner reflectors Target

28 Results – Target 20 - Methodology 1 - Same detection results were achieved by Methodologies 2 and 4 28

29 Results Methodology 1Methodology 2Methodology 4 Total False Alarm count 5141 Total False Alarm Rate 210108772 Methodology 1Methodology 2Methodology 4 False Alarm count (Low Vegetation) 030 False Alarm count (High & medium Vegetation) 5111 Total Per Vegetation type 29

30 Summary Methodology 1 (DCA) detected the targets with no false alarms when clutter is low vegetation. It did present false alarms in high vegetation; Methodology 2 (Coherence Test) typically detects the target with few false alarms in both situations; Methodology 3 (Freeman-Durden decomposition) generally presented high false alarm rates in this study; Methodology 4 (DCA + Coherence Test) performs better than DCA methodology on high vegetation clutter. 30

31 Thank you


Download ppt "Applying Target Decomposition Algorithms on the Detection of Man Made Targets Using Polarimetric SAR University of British Columbia September, 2007 Flavio."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google