Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 77 references

Dual-Branch Subpixel-Guided Network for Hyperspectral Image Classification

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A dual-branch network that fuses autoencoder-derived subpixel abundances with convolutional class features achieves top accuracy on three hyperspectral benchmarks.

desk verdict DSNet is a legit multi-task architecture with solid experiments, but the 'unsupervised subpixel guidance' claim is confounded by CE gradients flowing into the unmixing encoder. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.03893 v1 pith:2BCMPNNR submitted 2024-12-05 eess.IV cs.AIcs.CV

Zhu Han , Jin Yang , Lianru Gao , Zhiqiang Zeng , Bing Zhang , Jocelyn Chanussot This is my paper · ORCID
classification eess.IVcs.AIcs.CV
keywords hyperspectralimageclassificationdeeplearningsubpixelfeatureautoencodernetworkunmixingmixedpixelsspectral-spatialfusion
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper proposes DSNet, a dual-branch network that couples a deep autoencoder unmixing branch with a convolutional classifier branch for hyperspectral image classification. It claims that subpixel-level abundance maps, learned in an unsupervised manner from a spectral-angle reconstruction loss, carry diagnostic mixing information that sharpens the classifier's decision boundaries. On the Indian Pines, Berlin, and Augsburg benchmarks, DSNet reports the highest overall accuracy and Kappa among seven classic and hybrid deep-learning baselines, and the highest average accuracy on Indian Pines and Augsburg. The paper argues that subpixel information should be mined jointly with pixel-level features rather than ignored, and presents this as the first attempt to train an HSI classifier with jointly optimized reconstruction and cross-entropy losses.

What carries the argument

The engine of the method is the deep autoencoder unmixing branch, whose general mixing decoder implements the model $Y = MA + \Phi(MA) + N$, combining a linear mixture term with a nonlinear fluctuation term through a single trainable weight matrix $G$ that makes the decoder insensitive to the number of layers. The encoder produces abundance maps $\mathbf{v}_i$ with enforced abundance non-negativity and sum-to-one constraints using absolute-value rectification and summed normalization. A subpixel fusion module reduces the spatial dimension of the abundance patch with a stride-2 convolution, flattens it, and concatenates it with the pixel-level class feature from a two-layer 2D CNN branch; a linear layer converts the joint representation into class predictions. The network is trained end-to-end with the objective $\mathcal{L} = \lambda \mathcal{L}_{\mathrm{RE}} + (1-\lambda)\mathcal{L}_{\mathrm{CE}}$, where $\mathcal{L}_{\mathrm{RE}}$ is the spectral angle distance between the reconstructed and input patches and $\mathcal{L}_{\mathrm{CE}}$ is the cross-entropy classification loss.

What would settle it

A concrete test: run DSNet with the unmixing branch's encoder replaced by a randomly initialized, fixed feature extractor of the same architecture. If the classification gain over the CNN-only baseline persists, the improvement cannot be attributed to learned subpixel information; alternatively, compare the learned abundance maps against known reference abundances on synthetic mixed-pixel scenes, where ground-truth fractions are available, to check whether the abundances are physically correct.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that automatically integrating subpixel unmixing information with convolutional class features improves hyperspectral image classification. The deep autoencoder unmixing branch encodes each input patch into abundance maps that satisfy non-negativity and sum-to-one constraints and decodes them through a general mixing model that combines a linear mixture with a physically motivated nonlinear fluctuation term. A subpixel fusion module concatenates the spatial-reduced abundance maps with the CNN branch's class features before a final linear classifier, and the whole network is trained with a weighted sum of spectral-angle reconstruction loss and cross-entropy loss. In the reported experiments DSNet achieves the highest overall accuracy and Kappa on all three datasets, with best overall accuracy, average accuracy, and Kappa of 93.08%, 96.31%, and 92.08% on Indian Pines and corresponding leading marks on Berlin (72.09% OA, 59.27% Kappa) and Augsburg (89.30% OA, 84.62% Kappa). Ablation studies show that both the nonlinear decoder and the fusion module contribute to the gain, and the paper therefore claims that subpixel guidance yields more reliable decision boundaries and better class separation than pixel-level features alone.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the abundance maps learned by the autoencoder, trained only to reconstruct spectra, genuinely contain subpixel mixing information that helps the classifier; the paper explicitly declines to validate the unmixing results quantitatively.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • On the Indian Pines, Berlin, and Augsburg datasets, DSNet attains the highest overall accuracy and Kappa among all compared methods, and the highest average accuracy on Indian Pines and Augsburg.
  • Ablation experiments show the nonlinear decoder adds roughly 1.1 to 1.3 percentage points of overall accuracy over the linear decoder, and the subpixel fusion module adds another 1.3 to 2.1 points, indicating both components carry weight.
  • Per-epoch training time stays below the 3D CNN, GRU, ViT, MorphConv, and SSFTT baselines on all three datasets, so the dual-branch design does not come at prohibitive computational cost.
  • With training ratios at or below 20%, DSNet's accuracy drops below some hybrid baselines, suggesting the unsupervised unmixing branch needs a minimum amount of data to produce stable abundance estimates.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The paper does not quantitatively evaluate the estimated abundances; a direct test would compare DSNet's abundance maps against reference abundances on synthetic mixed-pixel data, or replace the trained unmixing branch with a random untrained encoder to see whether the accuracy gain persists. If the gain does persist, the benefit may come from added model capacity rather than subpixel information.
  • The optimal fusion weight $\lambda$ differs across datasets (0.2, 0.8, 0.1), so a learned or adaptive weighting scheme could improve robustness and reduce per-dataset tuning.
  • The same dual-branch recipe could transfer to other per-pixel remote sensing tasks, such as target detection or land-cover mapping from low-resolution satellite imagery where mixed pixels are common.
  • Because the unmixing branch saturates at low training ratios, pretraining it on unlabeled pixels or on a larger auxiliary scene could lower the data requirement for the joint classifier.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes DSNet, a dual-branch network for hyperspectral image classification. One branch is a deep autoencoder unmixing network with a general mixing decoder that estimates abundance maps; the other is a simple 2D CNN that extracts pixel-level class features. A subpixel fusion module concatenates a spatially transformed abundance representation with the class feature, and a linear classifier produces the prediction. Training minimizes a weighted sum of a spectral angle distance reconstruction loss and a cross-entropy classification loss. Experiments on Indian Pines, Berlin, and Augsburg report OA/AA/Kappa, per-class accuracy, training time, training-ratio curves, ablations, decoder-layer counts, the fusion weight λ, t-SNE plots, and abundance-map visualizations. The paper claims that DSNet achieves the highest classification accuracy on all three datasets and that the improvement is due to integrating unsupervised subpixel abundance information.

Significance. The motivating idea is useful: rather than treating every pixel as pure, a physically motivated mixing model could provide complementary subpixel information for classification. The experimental effort is substantial, with three datasets, seven comparison methods, ablations, computational cost comparisons, and code availability. However, the central causal claim is currently not established. As described in Section II-C, the cross-entropy loss backpropagates through the fusion module into the unmixing encoder, so the abundances are not trained in an unsupervised manner, contrary to the abstract's claim. The λ=0 experiment in Fig. 7 is not a true ablation of the unmixing branch, and Section III-D3 explicitly declines quantitative validation of the abundances. The accuracy gains in Table VI could therefore come from added capacity, the reconstruction regularizer, or class-supervised shaping of the encoder rather than from diagnostic subpixel information. The comparisons also lack error bars and significance testing. With additional controlled experiments, the contribution could be a valuable one, but the evidence in the current version does not support the mechanism claimed.

major comments (4)
  1. [§II-C, Eqs. (14)-(18); §III-D3] The classification loss L_CE is applied to p̂_i = W_out s_i, where s_i contains v_i, the encoder output of the unmixing branch. Consequently, CE gradients flow into the unmixing encoder through the fusion module, so the abundance maps are not extracted in an "unsupervised manner" as claimed in the Abstract and Section II-B1. The paper itself acknowledges this in Section III-D3, where the abundance maps are said to be "optimized from the perspective of both deep AE unmixing and CNN-based classifier network." This makes the ablation gains in Table VI (e.g., +3.88% OA on Indian Pines for the full model over the nonlinear-decoder-only variant) uninterpretable as evidence for the value of subpixel information. The authors should re-run the ablations with the abundance path detached from L_CE (e.g., stop-gradient on v_i before the fusion module, or training the unmixing branch in a separate phase with frozen weights) and report whether the accuracy gains persist.
  2. [§III-D2, Fig. 7] The statement "When λ is set to 0, it means that unmixing part has no effect" is incorrect. Setting λ=0 only removes the reconstruction loss L_RE; the unmixing encoder still receives gradients from L_CE through the fusion path, so the branch still influences the classifier. Fig. 7 therefore cannot be used to conclude that the unmixing part contributes nothing at λ=0 or that the performance increase with larger λ is due to subpixel information alone. A true disable condition would remove the fusion connection or freeze the unmixing encoder, and the corresponding curves should be reported.
  3. [Tables II-IV and Table VI] All quantitative results are reported as single runs without variance or significance tests. Several decisive differences are small, for example 89.30% vs. 87.66% OA on Augsburg and differences of about 1% between ablation configurations, and these could be within run-to-run variability. The authors should report mean and standard deviation over multiple random seeds for all methods and ablations, and where possible perform a significance test (e.g., McNemar's test or paired evaluation) to support the claim that DSNet is statistically superior.
  4. [§III-D3] The authors explicitly decline to validate the unmixing results quantitatively, and the abundance visualizations in Fig. 9 are not sufficient to show that the extracted maps encode genuine subpixel mixing information. The central claim would be substantially strengthened by a synthetic-data experiment with known endmembers and abundances, reporting abundance error or endmember SAD, or by a control network with the same architecture and capacity but without the reconstruction constraint. Without such evidence, the physical "subpixel" interpretation remains an untested assumption, and the classification gains could be a generic effect of the extra branch.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Eq. (9)] The index i is used both for the pixel/position index and as the summation index over abundance components; using a different dummy index (e.g., j) would make the normalization over the P abundance channels unambiguous.
  2. [§II-B1, Table I] The intermediate encoder dimensions are not clearly stated in the text. Table I lists L/2, L/4, and P for the three encoder blocks, but Eq. (8) writes h_i^(e) ∈ R^{P×H×H} for all layers; the text should clarify the channel dimensions at each layer.
  3. [Fig. 7] The three curves in Fig. 7 are not identified by a legend or distinct markers in the text description, making it difficult to associate each curve with Indian Pines, Berlin, and Augsburg. Adding a legend would improve readability.
  4. [I, Introduction] There are minor typos: "have be proposed" should be "have been proposed," and "urban planing" should be "urban planning."
  5. [Table I] The table mixes the unmixing decoder, the classifier output, and the fusion module in the same "Block 4/5" columns, which is confusing. Reformating the table so that the decoder and classifier paths are visually separated would help the reader follow the architecture.
  6. [Fig. 9] The abundance maps in Fig. 9 lack a color scale and axis labels; adding a colorbar and specifying which abundance/endmember each map corresponds to would make the visualization informative.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No circular derivation: DSNet's accuracy is externally benchmarked; the main issues are unsupported causal attribution and non-load-bearing self-citations, not circularity.

full rationale

The central performance claim (Section III-B) is tested on held-out test pixels with fixed splits shared by all methods (Tables II-IV), so the reported OA/AA/Kappa are external evidence rather than quantities reconstructed from the training objective. The 'unsupervised' claim is undermined by the paper's own equations: in Eq. (18), L = λL_RE + (1−λ)L_CE, and L_CE reaches the AE encoder through the fusion module (Eqs. 14-15), so CE supervises the 'abundance' branch; similarly, the statement that λ=0 means 'unmixing part has no effect' is not implied by the equations. These are confounds for the causal attribution of gains to subpixel content, not reductions of a prediction to its inputs. Section III-D3 explicitly declines to validate the abundances quantitatively, which further weakens the physical interpretation but again is a validity limitation. The prior unmixing self-citations (refs [59], [62]-[64]) are background and motivation; the decoder construction (Eqs. 10-12) is made in-paper and no load-bearing claim rests on an unverified self-cited theorem. Therefore no specific circular step can be exhibited, and the score reflects only minor, non-load-bearing self-citation.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central empirical claim rests on standard machine learning practice (train/test splits), the domain assumptions of linear and nonlinear spectral mixing, and the architecture-specific premise that autoencoder abundances are class-discriminative. The latter is the least supported.

free parameters (4)
  • fusion coefficient λ = 0.5 (fixed after tuning; per-dataset best: 0.2, 0.8, 0.1)
    Balances reconstruction and classification losses; tuned in Section III-D2 and fixed to 0.5 for fair comparison.
  • number of decoder layers K = 2 (fixed after tuning, range 1-5 tested)
    Controls nonlinear mixing depth; Table VII shows K=2 chosen to balance accuracy and stability.
  • patch size = 7x7 (Indian Pines, Augsburg), 5x5 (Berlin)
    Input spatial context size, chosen by dataset.
  • learning rate schedule = 1e-3, decay 0.9 per 50 epochs
    Training hyperparameter set empirically, described in Section III-A.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Spectral mixing is described by LMM plus a nonlinear fluctuation term (Eq. 5)
    The deep AE decoder is designed around this general mixing model, assuming it captures physical mixture properties.
  • domain assumption 1x1 convolution is equivalent to a fully connected layer for spectral unmixing
    Section II-B1 states this to justify using patch-based 1x1 convolutions as an AE encoder.
  • ad hoc to paper The extracted abundance maps are meaningful for classification
    The method's premise that unsupervised abundances guide classification is not independently validated; the paper explicitly declines to quantitatively evaluate unmixing.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Dual-Branch Subpixel-Guided Network for Hyperspectral Image Classification." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2BCMPNNR

@misc{pith2026241203893,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Dual-Branch Subpixel-Guided Network for Hyperspectral Image Classification},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2BCMPNNR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.03893}
}
read the original abstract

Deep learning (DL) has been widely applied into hyperspectral image (HSI) classification owing to its promising feature learning and representation capabilities. However, limited by the spatial resolution of sensors, existing DL-based classification approaches mainly focus on pixel-level spectral and spatial information extraction through complex network architecture design, while ignoring the existence of mixed pixels in actual scenarios. To tackle this difficulty, we propose a novel dual-branch subpixel-guided network for HSI classification, called DSNet, which automatically integrates subpixel information and convolutional class features by introducing a deep autoencoder unmixing architecture to enhance classification performance. DSNet is capable of fully considering physically nonlinear properties within subpixels and adaptively generating diagnostic abundances in an unsupervised manner to achieve more reliable decision boundaries for class label distributions. The subpixel fusion module is designed to ensure high-quality information fusion across pixel and subpixel features, further promoting stable joint classification. Experimental results on three benchmark datasets demonstrate the effectiveness and superiority of DSNet compared with state-of-the-art DL-based HSI classification approaches. The codes will be available at https://github.com/hanzhu97702/DSNet, contributing to the remote sensing community.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.03893 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Illustration to clarify the similarities and differences between the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The framework of the proposed DSNet, including deep AE unmixing network, CNN-based classifier network and subpixel fusion module. The deep [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. False-color image, GT and classification maps obtained by different methods on the Indian Pines dataset. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: False-color image, GT and classification maps obtained by different methods on the Berlin dataset. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: False-color image, GT and classification maps obtained by different methods on the Augsburg dataset. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The classification performance of each method with different ratios of training samples on three datasets. (a) Indian Pines. (b) Berlin. (c) Augsburg. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Visualization of class features obtained by only CNN-based classifier [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Visualization of the extracted abundance maps obtained by DSNet. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_9.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

77 extracted references · 72 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Hyperspectral remote sensing data analysis and future challenges,

    J. M. Bioucas-Dias, A. Plaza, G. Camps-Valls, P. Scheunders, N. Nasrabadi, and J. Chanussot, “Hyperspectral remote sensing data analysis and future challenges,” IEEE Geosci. Remote Sens. Mag., vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 6–36, Jun. 2013

    work page 2013

  2. [2]

    Recent advances on spectral–spatial hyperspectral image classification: An overview and new guidelines,

    L. He, J. Li, C. Liu, and S. Li, “Recent advances on spectral–spatial hyperspectral image classification: An overview and new guidelines,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens., vol. 56, no. 3, pp. 1579–1597, 2018

    work page 2018

  3. [3]

    Eigen-cnn: Eigenimages plus eigennoise level maps guided network for hyperspectral image denoising,

    L. Zhuang, M. K. Ng, L. Gao, and Z. Wang, “Eigen-cnn: Eigenimages plus eigennoise level maps guided network for hyperspectral image denoising,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. , pp. 1–18, 2024

    work page 2024

  4. [4]

    8 - hyperspectral remote sensing in precision agriculture: present status, challenges, and future trends,

    P. C. Pandey, P. K. Srivastava, H. Balzter, B. Bhattacharya, and G. P. Petropoulos, “8 - hyperspectral remote sensing in precision agriculture: present status, challenges, and future trends,” in Hyperspectral Remote Sens. Elsevier, 2020, pp. 121–146

    work page 2020

  5. [5]

    Hyperspectral vegetation indices and novel algorithms for predicting green lai of crop canopies: Modeling and validation in the context of precision agriculture,

    D. Haboudane, J. R. Miller, E. Pattey, P. J. Zarco-Tejada, and I. B. Strachan, “Hyperspectral vegetation indices and novel algorithms for predicting green lai of crop canopies: Modeling and validation in the context of precision agriculture,” Remote Sens. Environ., vol. 90, no. 3, pp. 337–352, 2004

    work page 2004

  6. [6]

    Understanding urban landuse from the above and ground perspectives: A deep learning, multimodal solution,

    S. Srivastava, J. E. Vargas-Munoz, and D. Tuia, “Understanding urban landuse from the above and ground perspectives: A deep learning, multimodal solution,” Remote Sens. Environ. , vol. 228, pp. 129–143, 2019

    2019

  7. [7]

    Local climate zone-based urban land cover classification from multi-seasonal sentinel-2 images with a recurrent residual network,

    C. Qiu, L. Mou, M. Schmitt, and X. X. Zhu, “Local climate zone-based urban land cover classification from multi-seasonal sentinel-2 images with a recurrent residual network,” ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens., vol. 154, pp. 151–162, 2019

    2019

  8. [8]

    Bs3lnet: A new blind-spot self-supervised learning network for hyperspectral anomaly detection,

    L. Gao, D. Wang, L. Zhuang, X. Sun, M. Huang, and A. Plaza, “Bs3lnet: A new blind-spot self-supervised learning network for hyperspectral anomaly detection,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. , vol. 61, pp. 1–18, 2023

    work page 2023

Show all 77 references
  1. [9]

    Hadgsm: A unified nonconvex framework for hyperspectral anomaly detection,

    L. Ren, L. Gao, M. Wang, X. Sun, and J. Chanussot, “Hadgsm: A unified nonconvex framework for hyperspectral anomaly detection,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. , vol. 62, pp. 1–15, 2024

    2024

  2. [10]

    Comparison of airborne hyperspectral data and eo-1 hyperion for mineral mapping,

    F. Kruse, J. Boardman, and J. Huntington, “Comparison of airborne hyperspectral data and eo-1 hyperion for mineral mapping,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. , vol. 41, no. 6, pp. 1388–1400, 2003

    2003

  3. [11]

    Hyperspectral remote sensing in litho- logical mapping, mineral exploration, and environmental geology: an updated review,

    S. Peyghambari and Y . Zhang, “Hyperspectral remote sensing in litho- logical mapping, mineral exploration, and environmental geology: an updated review,” J. Appl. Remote Sens. , vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 031 501– 031 501, 2021

    2021

  4. [12]

    Support vector machine versus random forest for remote sensing image classification: A meta-analysis and systematic review,

    M. Sheykhmousa, M. Mahdianpari, H. Ghanbari, F. Mohammadimanesh, P. Ghamisi, and S. Homayouni, “Support vector machine versus random forest for remote sensing image classification: A meta-analysis and systematic review,” IEEE J. Sel. Topics Appl. Earth Observ. Remote Sens., vo...

    2020

  5. [13]

    Spectral–spatial and cascaded multilayer random forests for tree species classification in airborne hyperspectral images,

    F. Tong and Y . Zhang, “Spectral–spatial and cascaded multilayer random forests for tree species classification in airborne hyperspectral images,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. , vol. 60, pp. 1–11, 2022

    2022

  6. [14]

    Unsupervised bayesian subpixel mapping of hyperspectral imagery based on band-weighted discrete spectral mixture model and markov random field,

    Y . Chen, L. Xu, Y . Fang, J. Peng, W. Yang, A. Wong, and D. A. Clausi, “Unsupervised bayesian subpixel mapping of hyperspectral imagery based on band-weighted discrete spectral mixture model and markov random field,” IEEE Geosci. Remote Sens. Lett. , vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 162–166, 2021

    2021

  7. [15]

    Subspace-based support vector machines for hyperspectral image classification,

    L. Gao, J. Li, M. Khodadadzadeh, A. Plaza, B. Zhang, Z. He, and H. Yan, “Subspace-based support vector machines for hyperspectral image classification,” IEEE Geosci. Remote Sens. Lett. , vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 349–353, 2014

    2014

  8. [16]

    Learning robust discriminant subspace based on joint l, -and l, -norm distance metrics,

    L. Fu, Z. Li, Q. Ye, H. Yin, Q. Liu, X. Chen, X. Fan, W. Yang, and G. Yang, “Learning robust discriminant subspace based on joint l, -and l, -norm distance metrics,” IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. Learn. Syst., vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 130–144, 2020

    2020

  9. [17]

    Pca-based edge- preserving features for hyperspectral image classification,

    X. Kang, X. Xiang, S. Li, and J. A. Benediktsson, “Pca-based edge- preserving features for hyperspectral image classification,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. , vol. 55, no. 12, pp. 7140–7151, 2017

    2017

  10. [18]

    Pca-based feature reduction for hyperspectral remote sensing image classification,

    M. P. Uddin, M. A. Mamun, and M. A. Hossain, “Pca-based feature reduction for hyperspectral remote sensing image classification,” IETE Tech. Rev., vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 377–396, 2021

    2021

  11. [19]

    Spectral and spatial classification of hyperspectral data using svms and morphological profiles,

    M. Fauvel, J. A. Benediktsson, J. Chanussot, and J. R. Sveinsson, “Spectral and spatial classification of hyperspectral data using svms and morphological profiles,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. , vol. 46, no. 11, pp. 3804–3814, 2008

    2008

  12. [20]

    Classification of hyperspectral images by using extended morphological attribute profiles and independent component analysis,

    M. Dalla Mura, A. Villa, J. A. Benediktsson, J. Chanussot, and L. Bruzzone, “Classification of hyperspectral images by using extended morphological attribute profiles and independent component analysis,” IEEE Geosci. Remote Sens. Lett. , vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 542–546, 2010

    2010

  13. [21]

    Mean-weighted collaborative representation- based spatial-spectral joint classification for hyperspec- tral images,

    H. Su, D. Shi, Z. Xue, and Q. Du, “Mean-weighted collaborative representation- based spatial-spectral joint classification for hyperspec- tral images,” IEEE J. Sel. Topics Appl. Earth Observ. Remote Sens. , pp. 1–15, 2024

    2024

  14. [22]

    Gabor-filtering-based nearest regularized subspace for hyperspectral image classification,

    W. Li and Q. Du, “Gabor-filtering-based nearest regularized subspace for hyperspectral image classification,” IEEE J. Sel. Topics Appl. Earth Observ. Remote Sens. , vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 1012–1022, 2014

    2014

  15. [23]

    Discriminative low-rank gabor filtering for spectral–spatial hyperspectral image classification,

    L. He, J. Li, A. Plaza, and Y . Li, “Discriminative low-rank gabor filtering for spectral–spatial hyperspectral image classification,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. , vol. 55, no. 3, pp. 1381–1395, 2016

    2016

  16. [24]

    Ensemble learning for hyperspectral image classification using tangent collaborative representation,

    H. Su, Y . Yu, Q. Du, and P. Du, “Ensemble learning for hyperspectral image classification using tangent collaborative representation,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. , vol. 58, no. 6, pp. 3778–3790, 2020

    2020

  17. [25]

    Spectral–spatial clas- sification of hyperspectral images with a superpixel-based discriminative sparse model,

    L. Fang, S. Li, X. Kang, and J. A. Benediktsson, “Spectral–spatial clas- sification of hyperspectral images with a superpixel-based discriminative sparse model,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. , vol. 53, no. 8, pp. 4186–4201, 2015

    2015

  18. [26]

    Spassa: Superpixelwise adaptive ssa for unsupervised spatial–spectral feature extraction in hyperspectral image,

    G. Sun, H. Fu, J. Ren, A. Zhang, J. Zabalza, X. Jia, and H. Zhao, “Spassa: Superpixelwise adaptive ssa for unsupervised spatial–spectral feature extraction in hyperspectral image,” IEEE Trans. Cybern., vol. 52, no. 7, pp. 6158–6169, 2021

    2021

  19. [27]

    Deep learning for hyperspectral image classification: An overview,

    S. Li, W. Song, L. Fang, Y . Chen, P. Ghamisi, and J. A. Benediktsson, “Deep learning for hyperspectral image classification: An overview,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens., vol. 57, no. 9, pp. 6690–6709, 2019

    2019

  20. [28]

    Sar automatic target recognition method based on multi-stream complex-valued networks,

    Z. Zeng, J. Sun, Z. Han, and W. Hong, “Sar automatic target recognition method based on multi-stream complex-valued networks,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. , vol. 60, pp. 1–18, 2022

    2022

  21. [29]

    Sar-atr with knowledge hierarchy division and information dissemination networks,

    Z. Zeng, J. Sun, X. Yao, D. Gu, and W. Hong, “Sar-atr with knowledge hierarchy division and information dissemination networks,” ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens. , vol. 206, pp. 242–257, 2023

    2023

  22. [30]

    Spatio-temporal multi-level attention crop mapping method using time- series sar imagery,

    Z. Han, C. Zhang, L. Gao, Z. Zeng, B. Zhang, and P. M. Atkinson, “Spatio-temporal multi-level attention crop mapping method using time- series sar imagery,” ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens. , vol. 206, pp. 293–310, 2023

    2023

  23. [31]

    Model- informed multistage unsupervised network for hyperspectral image super-resolution,

    J. Li, K. Zheng, L. Gao, L. Ni, M. Huang, and J. Chanussot, “Model- informed multistage unsupervised network for hyperspectral image super-resolution,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. , vol. 62, pp. 1– 17, 2024

    2024

  24. [32]

    Going deeper with contextual cnn for hyperspec- tral image classification,

    H. Lee and H. Kwon, “Going deeper with contextual cnn for hyperspec- tral image classification,” IEEE Trans. Image Process. , vol. 26, no. 10, pp. 4843–4855, 2017. 12

    2017

  25. [33]

    Diverse region-based cnn for hyperspec- tral image classification,

    M. Zhang, W. Li, and Q. Du, “Diverse region-based cnn for hyperspec- tral image classification,” IEEE Trans. Image Process. , vol. 27, no. 6, pp. 2623–2634, 2018

    2018

  26. [34]

    Feedback attention- based dense cnn for hyperspectral image classification,

    C. Yu, R. Han, M. Song, C. Liu, and C.-I. Chang, “Feedback attention- based dense cnn for hyperspectral image classification,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. , vol. 60, pp. 1–16, 2021

    2021

  27. [35]

    Multiscale dynamic graph convolutional network for hyperspectral image classifica- tion,

    S. Wan, C. Gong, P. Zhong, B. Du, L. Zhang, and J. Yang, “Multiscale dynamic graph convolutional network for hyperspectral image classifica- tion,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens., vol. 58, no. 5, pp. 3162–3177, 2019

    2019

  28. [36]

    Graph convolutional networks for hyperspectral image classification,

    D. Hong, L. Gao, J. Yao, B. Zhang, A. Plaza, and J. Chanussot, “Graph convolutional networks for hyperspectral image classification,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. , vol. 59, no. 7, pp. 5966–5978, 2020

    2020

  29. [37]

    Nonlocal graph convolutional networks for hyperspectral image classification,

    L. Mou, X. Lu, X. Li, and X. X. Zhu, “Nonlocal graph convolutional networks for hyperspectral image classification,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens., vol. 58, no. 12, pp. 8246–8257, 2020

    2020

  30. [38]

    Deep recurrent neural networks for hyperspectral image classification,

    L. Mou, P. Ghamisi, and X. X. Zhu, “Deep recurrent neural networks for hyperspectral image classification,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. , vol. 55, no. 7, pp. 3639–3655, 2017

    2017

  31. [39]

    Spatial se- quential recurrent neural network for hyperspectral image classification,

    X. Zhang, Y . Sun, K. Jiang, C. Li, L. Jiao, and H. Zhou, “Spatial se- quential recurrent neural network for hyperspectral image classification,” IEEE J. Sel. Topics Appl. Earth Observ. Remote Sens. , vol. 11, no. 11, pp. 4141–4155, 2018

    2018

  32. [40]

    Spectral-spatial classi- fication for hyperspectral image based on a single gru,

    E. Pan, X. Mei, Q. Wang, Y . Ma, and J. Ma, “Spectral-spatial classi- fication for hyperspectral image based on a single gru,” Neurocomput., vol. 387, pp. 150–160, 2020

    2020

  33. [41]

    Spectralformer: Rethinking hyperspectral image classification with transformers,

    D. Hong, Z. Han, J. Yao, L. Gao, B. Zhang, A. Plaza, and J. Chanus- sot, “Spectralformer: Rethinking hyperspectral image classification with transformers,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. , vol. 60, pp. 1–15, 2021

    2021

  34. [42]

    Spatial-spectral transformer for hyperspec- tral image classification,

    X. He, Y . Chen, and Z. Lin, “Spatial-spectral transformer for hyperspec- tral image classification,” Remote Sens., vol. 13, no. 3, p. 498, 2021

    2021

  35. [43]

    Morphological convolutional neural networks for hyperspectral image classification,

    S. K. Roy, R. Mondal, M. E. Paoletti, J. M. Haut, and A. Plaza, “Morphological convolutional neural networks for hyperspectral image classification,” IEEE J. Sel. Topics Appl. Earth Observ. Remote Sens. , vol. 14, pp. 8689–8702, 2021

    2021

  36. [44]

    Spectral–spatial feature tokenization transformer for hyperspectral image classification,

    L. Sun, G. Zhao, Y . Zheng, and Z. Wu, “Spectral–spatial feature tokenization transformer for hyperspectral image classification,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. , vol. 60, pp. 1–14, 2022

    2022

  37. [45]

    Weighted feature fusion of convolutional neural network and graph attention network for hyper- spectral image classification,

    Y . Dong, Q. Liu, B. Du, and L. Zhang, “Weighted feature fusion of convolutional neural network and graph attention network for hyper- spectral image classification,” IEEE Trans. Image Process., vol. 31, pp. 1559–1572, 2022

    2022

  38. [46]

    Invariant subpixel material detection in hyper- spectral imagery,

    B. Thai and G. Healey, “Invariant subpixel material detection in hyper- spectral imagery,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens., vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 599–608, 2002

    2002

  39. [47]

    Spectral unmixing,

    N. Keshava and J. F. Mustard, “Spectral unmixing,” IEEE Signal Process. Mag., vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 44–57, Jan. 2002

    2002

  40. [48]

    Hyperspectral sparse unmixing via nonconvex shrinkage penalties,

    L. Ren, D. Hong, L. Gao, X. Sun, M. Huang, and J. Chanussot, “Hyperspectral sparse unmixing via nonconvex shrinkage penalties,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. , vol. 61, pp. 1–15, 2022

    2022

  41. [49]

    Reinforcement learning for neural architecture search in hyperspectral unmixing,

    Z. Han, D. Hong, L. Gao, S. K. Roy, B. Zhang, and J. Chanussot, “Reinforcement learning for neural architecture search in hyperspectral unmixing,” IEEE Geosci. Remote Sens. Lett. , vol. 19, pp. 1–5, 2022

    2022

  42. [50]

    Comparative study between a new nonlinear model and common linear model for analysing laboratory simulated-forest hyperspectral data,

    W. Fan, B. Hu, J. Miller, and M. Li, “Comparative study between a new nonlinear model and common linear model for analysing laboratory simulated-forest hyperspectral data,” Int. J. Remote Sens., vol. 30, no. 11, pp. 2951–2962, Jun. 2009

    2009

  43. [51]

    Semi-supervised linear spectral unmixing using a hierarchical bayesian model for hyperspectral imagery,

    N. Dobigeon, J.-Y . Tourneret, and C.-I. Chang, “Semi-supervised linear spectral unmixing using a hierarchical bayesian model for hyperspectral imagery,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process. , vol. 56, no. 7, pp. 2684–2695, Jul. 2008

    2008

  44. [52]

    Nonlinear unmixing of hyperspectral images: Models and algorithms,

    N. Dobigeon, J.-Y . Tourneret, C. Richard, J. C. M. Bermudez, S. McLaughlin, and A. O. Hero, “Nonlinear unmixing of hyperspectral images: Models and algorithms,” IEEE Signal Process. Mag. , vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 82–94, Jan. 2013

    2013

  45. [53]

    A review of nonlinear hyperspec- tral unmixing methods,

    R. Heylen, M. Parente, and P. Gader, “A review of nonlinear hyperspec- tral unmixing methods,” IEEE J. Sel. Topics Appl. Earth Observ. Remote Sens., vol. 7, no. 6, pp. 1844–1868, Jun. 2014

    2014

  46. [54]

    Supervised nonlinear spectral unmixing using a postnonlinear mixing model for hyperspectral imagery,

    Y . Altmann, A. Halimi, N. Dobigeon, and J.-Y . Tourneret, “Supervised nonlinear spectral unmixing using a postnonlinear mixing model for hyperspectral imagery,” IEEE Trans. Image Process., vol. 21, no. 6, pp. 3017–3025, Jun. 2012

    2012

  47. [55]

    A multilinear mixing model for nonlinear spectral unmixing,

    R. Heylen and P. Scheunders, “A multilinear mixing model for nonlinear spectral unmixing,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. , vol. 54, no. 1, pp. 240–251, Jan. 2016

    2016

  48. [56]

    Band-wise nonlinear unmixing for hyperspectral imagery using an extended multilinear mixing model,

    B. Yang and B. Wang, “Band-wise nonlinear unmixing for hyperspectral imagery using an extended multilinear mixing model,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. , vol. 56, no. 11, pp. 6747–6762, Nov. 2018

    2018

  49. [57]

    Daen: Deep autoencoder networks for hyperspectral unmixing,

    Y . Su, J. Li, A. Plaza, A. Marinoni, P. Gamba, and S. Chakravortty, “Daen: Deep autoencoder networks for hyperspectral unmixing,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. , vol. 57, no. 7, pp. 4309–4321, 2019

    2019

  50. [58]

    Nonlinear unmixing of hyperspectral data via deep autoencoder networks,

    M. Wang, M. Zhao, J. Chen, and S. Rahardja, “Nonlinear unmixing of hyperspectral data via deep autoencoder networks,” IEEE Geosci. Remote Sens. Lett. , vol. 16, no. 9, pp. 1467–1471, 2019

    2019

  51. [59]

    Deep half- siamese networks for hyperspectral unmixing,

    Z. Han, D. Hong, L. Gao, B. Zhang, and J. Chanussot, “Deep half- siamese networks for hyperspectral unmixing,” IEEE Geosci. Remote Sens. Lett., vol. 18, no. 11, pp. 1996–2000, 2020

    1996

  52. [60]

    Convolutional autoencoder for spectral–spatial hyperspectral unmixing,

    B. Palsson, M. O. Ulfarsson, and J. R. Sveinsson, “Convolutional autoencoder for spectral–spatial hyperspectral unmixing,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. , vol. 59, no. 1, pp. 535–549, 2020

    2020

  53. [61]

    A plug-and-play priors framework for hyperspectral unmixing,

    M. Zhao, X. Wang, J. Chen, and W. Chen, “A plug-and-play priors framework for hyperspectral unmixing,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens., vol. 60, pp. 1–13, 2021

    2021

  54. [62]

    Cycu-net: Cycle- consistency unmixing network by learning cascaded autoencoders,

    L. Gao, Z. Han, D. Hong, B. Zhang, and J. Chanussot, “Cycu-net: Cycle- consistency unmixing network by learning cascaded autoencoders,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. , vol. 60, pp. 1–14, 2021

    2021

  55. [63]

    Au- tonas: Automatic neural architecture search for hyperspectral unmixing,

    Z. Han, D. Hong, L. Gao, B. Zhang, M. Huang, and J. Chanussot, “Au- tonas: Automatic neural architecture search for hyperspectral unmixing,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. , vol. 60, pp. 1–14, 2022

    2022

  56. [64]

    Multimodal hyperspectral unmixing: Insights from attention networks,

    Z. Han, D. Hong, L. Gao, J. Yao, B. Zhang, and J. Chanussot, “Multimodal hyperspectral unmixing: Insights from attention networks,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. , vol. 60, pp. 1–13, 2022

    2022

  57. [65]

    Application of lithological map- ping based on advanced hyperspectral imager (ahsi) imagery onboard gaofen-5 (gf-5) satellite,

    B. Ye, S. Tian, Q. Cheng, and Y . Ge, “Application of lithological map- ping based on advanced hyperspectral imager (ahsi) imagery onboard gaofen-5 (gf-5) satellite,” Remote Sens., vol. 12, no. 23, p. 3990, 2020

    2020

  58. [66]

    Advances in spaceborne hyperspectral remote sensing in china,

    Y . Zhong, X. Wang, S. Wang, and L. Zhang, “Advances in spaceborne hyperspectral remote sensing in china,” Geo-spatial Inf. Sci. , vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 95–120, 2021

    2021

  59. [67]

    Appraisal of enmap hyperspectral imagery use in lulc mapping when combined with machine learning pixel-based classifiers,

    C. Lekka, G. P. Petropoulos, and S. E. Detsikas, “Appraisal of enmap hyperspectral imagery use in lulc mapping when combined with machine learning pixel-based classifiers,” Environ. Modell. Software, vol. 173, p. 105956, 2024

    2024

  60. [68]

    Cnn-based hyperspectral pansharpening with arbitrary resolution,

    L. He, J. Zhu, J. Li, A. Plaza, J. Chanussot, and Z. Yu, “Cnn-based hyperspectral pansharpening with arbitrary resolution,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. , vol. 60, pp. 1–21, 2021

    2021

  61. [69]

    X-shaped interactive autoencoders with cross-modality mutual learning for unsupervised hyperspectral image super-resolution,

    J. Li, K. Zheng, Z. Li, L. Gao, and X. Jia, “X-shaped interactive autoencoders with cross-modality mutual learning for unsupervised hyperspectral image super-resolution,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens., vol. 61, pp. 1–17, 2023

    2023

  62. [70]

    Model-guided coarse- to-fine fusion network for unsupervised hyperspectral image super- resolution,

    J. Li, K. Zheng, W. Liu, Z. Li, H. Yu, and L. Ni, “Model-guided coarse- to-fine fusion network for unsupervised hyperspectral image super- resolution,” IEEE Geosci. Remote Sens. Lett. , vol. 20, pp. 1–5, 2023

    2023

  63. [71]

    Nonlinear unmixing of hyperspec- tral data based on a linear-mixture/nonlinear-fluctuation model,

    J. Chen, C. Richard, and P. Honeine, “Nonlinear unmixing of hyperspec- tral data based on a linear-mixture/nonlinear-fluctuation model,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 61, no. 2, pp. 480–492, 2012

    2012

  64. [72]

    Deep learning classifiers for hyperspectral imaging: A review,

    M. E. Paoletti, J. M. Haut, J. Plaza, and A. Plaza, “Deep learning classifiers for hyperspectral imaging: A review,” ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens., vol. 158, pp. 279–317, 2019

    2019

  65. [73]

    Deep feature extraction and classification of hyperspectral images based on convolutional neural networks,

    Y . Chen, H. Jiang, C. Li, X. Jia, and P. Ghamisi, “Deep feature extraction and classification of hyperspectral images based on convolutional neural networks,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens., vol. 54, no. 10, pp. 6232– 6251, 2016

    2016

  66. [74]

    Attention is all you need,

    A. Vaswani, N. Shazeer, N. Parmar, J. Uszkoreit, L. Jones, A. N. Gomez, Ł. Kaiser, and I. Polosukhin, “Attention is all you need,” Proc. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. , vol. 30, 2017

    2017

  67. [75]

    Imaging spectroscopy and the airborne visible/infrared imaging spectrometer (aviris),

    R. O. Green, M. L. Eastwood, C. M. Sarture, T. G. Chrien, M. Aronsson, B. J. Chippendale, J. A. Faust, B. E. Pavri, C. J. Chovit, M. Solis et al., “Imaging spectroscopy and the airborne visible/infrared imaging spectrometer (aviris),” Remote Sens. Environ. , vol. 65, no. 3, pp...

    1998

  68. [76]

    Characterisation methods for the hyperspectral sensor hyspex at dlr’s calibration home base,

    A. Baumgartner, P. Gege, C. K ¨ohler, K. Lenhard, and T. Schwarzmaier, “Characterisation methods for the hyperspectral sensor hyspex at dlr’s calibration home base,” in Sensors, Systems, and Next-Generation Satel- lites XVI, vol. 8533. SPIE, 2012, pp. 371–378

    2012

  69. [77]

    Visualizing data using t-sne

    L. Van der Maaten and G. Hinton, “Visualizing data using t-sne.” J. Mach. Learn. Res. , vol. 9, no. 11, 2008

    2008

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.