Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 82 references

Hyper-spectral Unmixing algorithms for remote compositional surface mapping: a review of the state of the art

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This review organizes hyper-spectral unmixing — recovering minerals and their proportions from remote images — and concludes its open problems are statistical: untested assumptions, no uncertainty quantification, no transfer learning.

desk verdict A reliable classical-review core with an honest but unsubstantiated 'state of the art' claim: the deep-learning section stops around 2019 and no selection criteria are given. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.14260 v1 pith:WAFFMAFU submitted 2025-07-18 astro-ph.IM astro-ph.EPcs.CV

Alfredo Gimenez Zapiola , Andrea Boselli , Alessandra Menafoglio , Simone Vantini This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.IMastro-ph.EPcs.CV
keywords hyperspectralunmixingendmemberextractionabundanceestimationlinearmixingmodelsparsenonlinearspectrallibrariesremotesensing
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 review aims to establish an up-to-date, organized picture of hyper-spectral unmixing, the set of methods that turn remote images of Earth and other solid bodies into maps of surface minerals and their abundances. The paper groups the field into a classical workflow built on the linear mixing model, plus alternatives including sparse unmixing, nonlinear and physics-based models, and neural networks, and it surveys the datasets and spectral libraries used to test them. Its central message is that the algorithms are mature but the statistical foundations are not: model assumptions such as linear mixing and the pure-pixel hypothesis go untested, and outputs are rarely accompanied by uncertainty estimates. The paper closes by recommending concrete research directions, chiefly uncertainty quantification, statistical testing of model assumptions, and transfer learning across images of different planets.

What carries the argument

The organizing object is the linear mixing model $Y = MX + W$, in which the hyperspectral image $Y$ is written as a product of an end-member (mixing) matrix $M$ and an abundance matrix $X$ plus noise $W$, with the abundances constrained to be nonnegative and to sum to one. Its geometric content is the identification of end members with the vertices of a simplex in reflectance space, which the review turns into a taxonomy: the number of end members is estimated by eigen-thresholding routines such as HySime, the vertices are found by pure-pixel algorithms (VCA, N-FINDR) or minimum-volume simplices (MVC-NMF, SISAL), and abundances follow from least squares. The same formulation carries the alternative workflows, since sparse unmixing reuses it with a spectral library in place of $M$ and sparsity penalties, while nonlinear extensions (bilinear, multilinear, Hapke, kernel methods) are described as relaxations of the same additive scheme.

What would settle it

An independent systematic review of the hyperspectral-unmixing literature with explicit inclusion criteria would settle the representativeness claim: if it turned up a substantial number of widely used methods, libraries, or image cubes absent from this survey, the claim of covering the most successful and relevant state of the art would be shown incomplete. A simpler check is bibliometric: if the methods the paper promotes are not among the most-cited in the past decade, the selection is not representative.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that hyper-spectral unmixing reduces to a well-defined inverse problem that the field solves with a dominant template: under the linear mixing model each pixel spectrum is a convex combination of end-member spectra, so end members are the vertices of a data simplex and abundances are obtained by (fully) constrained least squares. Around this template the review organizes the most successful algorithms, from pure-pixel simplex methods such as VCA to minimum-volume and Bayesian alternatives, together with sparse unmixing that swaps extraction for spectral libraries and nonlinear models for intimate and multilayered mixing. The review's own assessment is that the decisive open problems are statistical rather than algorithmic, and it identifies uncertainty quantification, testing of model assumptions, and transfer learning as the gaps that future research should fill.

Load-bearing premise

The review's claim to cover the most successful methods and the most important datasets rests on the authors' informal selection: no systematic search or inclusion criteria are described, so another team could survey different methods and arrive at different open problems.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The pure-pixel hypothesis underpins the most popular end-member extractors, so scenes with low spatial resolution or intimate mixing are where those methods should be expected to fail.
  • Switching from end-member extraction to a spectral library moves the difficulty into library preprocessing and mutual coherence, which is why spatial-regularized and collaborative sparse variants were introduced.
  • The nonlinear models that matter in practice — bilinear, multilinear, and Hapke-based intimate mixing — mostly assume end members are known, limiting their use when spectra must be guessed from data.
  • AVIRIS Cuprite, with USGS ground-truth maps, is the reference testbed for Earth, while CRISM and OMEGA Mars images serve the planetary case, so progress claims should be judged against these.
  • The review's recommended directions — uncertainty quantification, statistical tests of assumptions, and transfer learning — are concrete enough to guide method development beyond yet another extraction algorithm.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A direct way to test the review's diagnosis would be to run one well-known extractor (e.g., VCA) and one minimum-volume method on the same Cuprite scene and measure how much abundance maps differ when the pure-pixel and linear assumptions are relaxed; the review compares methods descriptively but runs no such benchmark.
  • The transfer-learning recommendation points toward a concrete product the review does not build: a network pre-trained on the surveyed cubes and libraries that outputs abundance maps with error bars and is fine-tuned on a new planetary image; the ingredients, such as autoencoders and spatial Bayesian networks, are all cited.
  • Because only Cuprite and a few other scenes have ground truth, the field's validation bottleneck might be addressed by a shared benchmark of synthetic scenes with known compositions and controlled mixing types, a step beyond the real-cube list the review compiles.
  • If uncertainty quantification becomes standard, composition maps would carry per-pixel error bars, which would change how planetary missions decide where to look; that consequence is implicit in the review's recommendations but not stated.
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

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper is a narrative review of hyperspectral unmixing (HU) for remote compositional surface mapping of the Earth and other solid bodies. It formulates the linear mixing model and its constrained least-squares solutions, describes endmember extraction and abundance estimation (VCA, N-FINDR, minimum-volume NMF, Bayesian methods, sparse unmixing with SUnSAL), covers bilinear, multilinear, Hapke-based intimate mixing and kernelized nonlinear methods, discusses spectral variability and early neural-network unmixing, surveys spectral libraries and hyperspectral cubes (AVIRIS Cuprite, CRISM, OMEGA, and others), and closes with open problems and research recommendations. No new algorithms, experiments, or data are presented; the content is explicitly attributed to the cited literature.

Significance. If the coverage is accepted as representative, the review is a useful and generally faithful synthesis: the mathematical descriptions of the mixing models and optimization problems are accurate, the dataset survey is well organized, the comparative tables provide a quick orientation, and the recommendations on uncertainty quantification, model diagnostics, and transfer learning are concrete and actionable. The main risk is the gap between the claimed scope (a detailed, up-to-date review of the state of the art including the most recent methodologies) and the actual coverage, which is strongest for classical and early alternative methods and weakest for the post-2019 deep-unmixing literature.

major comments (2)
  1. [§4.3] The neural-network subsection is not current relative to the review's stated scope. The only HU-specific deep architectures discussed are a 2018 linear autoencoder [52], DAEN from 2019 [53], and a 2018 CNN [54]; the later references cited in this subsection ([55]-[59]) concern remote-sensing tasks other than unmixing, and the text states that incorporating such architectures into HU is a 'critical research direction.' This is inconsistent with the abstract and Section 1 claims of covering 'the most recent methodologies' and the state of the art, because a substantial 2020-2025 HU deep-unmixing literature now exists, including transformer-based models, advanced autoencoder/spectral-variability architectures, and deep sparse-unmixing methods. The authors should either expand this subsection to include that literature or explicitly narrow the scope and recast the neural-network part as an outlook rather than a description of the current state of the art.
  2. [§1] The selection procedure is not described. The introduction states that the objective is 'to perform a selection of the most successful ones,' but no inclusion criteria, search databases, time window, or screening method are given. The absence of such criteria makes it impossible for the reader to distinguish a considered omission from an oversight, and it weakens the load-bearing claim of representativeness. Please add a short paragraph describing how the reviewed methods and datasets were selected, or revise the title/abstract claims to present the work as a selective rather than comprehensive state-of-the-art review.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§3.1 and elsewhere] The abundance non-negativity and sum constraints are referred to as '(3.1)' in several places, but the constraints are not numbered in the display equations; please add equation numbers or use textual references.
  2. [§3.1, Eq. (6)] The text says 'where ∥·∥q is the q-norm,' but equation (6) uses ∥·∥2; the notation should be harmonized.
  3. [§6.1] There are several typos, including 'in that sinterdisciplinaryiplinary problem' (should be 'interdisciplinary'), 'Antother key library' in §5.1, 'downs caled' in the caption of Figure 4, and 'Endbember extraction' in Table 2.
  4. [§4.1] The phrase 'the spectral gathering phase is carried out differently' is unclear; a short explanation of what this phase is would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the review derives no results and fits no parameters; all technical content is attributed to external literature.

full rationale

This paper is a narrative review of hyper-spectral unmixing methods, datasets, and open problems. It contains no derivation chain of its own, no fitted parameters, and no prediction that could reduce to its inputs. The technical content, including the linear mixing model, VCA, minimum-volume methods, SUnSAL, bilinear models, Hapke's model, and neural-network unmixers, is explicitly attributed to the cited external references, and the review's own contributions are limited to organizing, comparing, and recommending research directions. The recommendations (uncertainty quantification, model diagnostics, transfer learning) are explicitly framed as open problems and suggestions, not as results derived from data. There are no self-citations by the present authors that carry any load-bearing role, and no definitional or fitted-input circularity is present. The concern that the selection of methods is not justified by explicit inclusion criteria and that some recent deep-unmixing literature is omitted is a comprehensiveness and correctness risk, not a form of circularity. Accordingly, the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 1 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The review introduces no new free parameters, derived quantities, or invented entities. It relies on domain assumptions about the accuracy and representativeness of the summarized literature.

assumptions (1)
  • domain assumption The cited literature is accurately summarized, and the selected methods and datasets are representative of the field.
    The review does not independently re-verify the original results; its conclusions rest on trust in the primary sources and the authors' selection criteria. No systematic inclusion protocol is described.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Hyper-spectral Unmixing algorithms for remote compositional surface mapping: a review of the state of the art." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/WAFFMAFU

@misc{pith2026250714260,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Hyper-spectral Unmixing algorithms for remote compositional surface mapping: a review of the state of the art},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/WAFFMAFU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.14260}
}
read the original abstract

This work concerns a detailed review of data analysis methods used for remotely sensed images of large areas of the Earth and of other solid astronomical objects. In detail, it focuses on the problem of inferring the materials that cover the surfaces captured by hyper-spectral images and estimating their abundances and spatial distributions within the region. The most successful and relevant hyper-spectral unmixing methods are reported as well as compared, as an addition to analysing the most recent methodologies. The most important public data-sets in this setting, which are vastly used in the testing and validation of the former, are also systematically explored. Finally, open problems are spotlighted and concrete recommendations for future research are provided.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.14260 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Workflow for solving the HU problem: classical methodology [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Workflow for solving the HU problem: sparse unmixing [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Plot of 10 randomly chosen spectra from Chapter M of the USGS spectral library [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Visualisation of the AVIRIS Cuprite hyper cube downs caled to three (red, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

82 extracted references · 76 canonical work pages

  1. [52]

    Palsson, J

    B. Palsson, J. Sigurdsson, J. R. Sveinsson, M. O. Ulfarsson, Hyper- spectral unmixing using a neural network autoencoder, IEEE Access 6 (2018) 25646–25656

    work page 2018

  2. [53]

    Y. Su, J. Li, A. Plaza, A. Marinoni, P. Gamba, S. Chakravortty, Daen: Deep autoencoder networks for hyperspectral unmixing, IEEE Transac- tions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 57 (2019) 4309–4321

    work page 2019

  3. [54]

    Zhang, Y

    X. Zhang, Y. Sun, J. Zhang, P. Wu, L. Jiao, Hyperspectral unmixing via deep convolutional neural networks, IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters 15 (2018) 1755–1759

    work page 2018

  4. [55]

    C. Li, B. Zhang, D. Hong, J. Zhou, G. Vivone, S. Li, J. Chanussot, Casformer: Cascaded transformers for fusion-aware computational hyperspectral imaging, Information Fusion 108 (2024) 102408. URL: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1566253524001866. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inffus.2024.102408

    arXiv 2024

  5. [59]

    K. Chen, B. Chen, C. Liu, W. Li, Z. Zou, Z. Shi, Rs- mamba: Remote sensing image classification with state space model, IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters 21 (2024) 1–5. doi:10.1109/LGRS.2024.3407111

    work page arXiv 2024

  6. [1]

    G. A. Shaw, H. K. Burke, Spectral imaging for remote sensing, Lincoln laboratory journal 14 (2003) 3–28

    2003

  7. [2]

    J. M. Bioucas-Dias, A. Plaza, N. Dobigeon, M. Parente, Q. Du, P. Gader, J. Chanussot, Hyperspectral unmixing overview: Geometrical, statisti- cal, and sparse regression-based approaches, IEEE journal of selected topics in applied earth observations and remote sensing 5 (2012) 354– 379. 32

    2012

  8. [3]

    Broadwater, A

    J. Broadwater, A. Banerjee, A generalized kernel for areal and intimate mixtures, in: 2010 2nd Workshop on Hyperspectral Image and Signal Processing: Evolution in Remote Sensing, IEEE, 2010, pp. 1–4

    work page 2010

Show all 82 references
  1. [4]

    Heylen, M

    R. Heylen, M. Parente, P. Gader, A review of nonlinear hyperspectral unmixing methods, IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing 7 (2014) 1844–1868

    2014

  2. [5]

    Ghamisi, N

    P. Ghamisi, N. Yokoya, J. Li, W. Liao, S. Liu, J. Plaza, B. Rasti, A. Plaza, Advances in hyperspectral image and signal processing: A comprehensive overview of the state of the art, IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Magazine 5 (2017) 37–78

    2017

  3. [6]

    B.-C. Gao, K. B. Heidebrecht, A. F. Goetz, Deriva- tion of scaled surface reflectances from aviris data, Re- mote Sensing of Environment 44 (1993) 165–178. URL: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/003442579390014O. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/0034-4257(93)90014-O...

    1993

  4. [7]

    Iordache, J

    M.-D. Iordache, J. M. Bioucas-Dias, A. Plaza, Sparse unmixing of hy- perspectral data, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 49 (2011) 2014–2039

    2011

  5. [8]

    L. Miao, H. Qi, Endmember extraction from highly mixed data using minimum volume constrained nonnegative matrix factorization, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 45 (2007) 765–777

    2007

  6. [9]

    J. M. Bioucas-Dias, A. Plaza, G. Camps-Valls, P. Scheunders, N. Nasrabadi, J. Chanussot, Hyperspectral remote sensing data analysis and future challenges, IEEE Geoscience and remote sensing magazine 1 (2013) 6–36

    2013

  7. [10]

    Hapke, Bidirectional reflectance spectroscopy: 1

    B. Hapke, Bidirectional reflectance spectroscopy: 1. theory, Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth 86 (1981) 3039–3054

    1981

  8. [11]

    Heylen, P

    R. Heylen, P. Scheunders, A multilinear mixing model for nonlinear spectral unmixing, IEEE transactions on geoscience and remote sensing 54 (2015) 240–251. 33

    2015

  9. [12]

    Keshava, J

    N. Keshava, J. F. Mustard, Spectral unmixing, IEEE signal processing magazine 19 (2002) 44–57

    2002

  10. [13]

    Dobigeon, J.-Y

    N. Dobigeon, J.-Y. Tourneret, C. Richard, J. C. M. Bermudez, S. McLaughlin, A. O. Hero, Nonlinear unmixing of hyperspectral images: Models and algorithms, IEEE Signal processing magazine 31 (2013) 82– 94

    2013

  11. [14]

    Ambikapathi, T.-H

    A. Ambikapathi, T.-H. Chan, W.-K. Ma, C.-Y. Chi, Chance-constrained robust minimum-volume enclosing simplex algorithm for hyperspectral unmixing, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 49 (2011) 4194–4209

    2011

  12. [15]

    Chan, C.-Y

    T.-H. Chan, C.-Y. Chi, Y.-M. Huang, W.-K. Ma, A convex analysis- based minimum-volume enclosing simplex algorithm for hyperspectral unmixing, IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing 57 (2009) 4418– 4432

    2009

  13. [16]

    Chan, W.-K

    T.-H. Chan, W.-K. Ma, A. Ambikapathi, C.-Y. Chi, A simplex vol- ume maximization framework for hyperspectral endmember extraction, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 49 (2011) 4177– 4193

    2011

  14. [17]

    Halimi, Y

    A. Halimi, Y. Altmann, N. Dobigeon, J.-Y. Tourneret, Nonlinear un- mixing of hyperspectral images using a generalized bilinear model, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 49 (2011) 4153–4162

    2011

  15. [18]

    X. Tao, M. E. Paoletti, J. M. Haut, P. Ren, J. Plaza, A. Plaza, End- member estimation with maximum distance analysis, Remote Sensing 13 (2021) 713

    2021

  16. [19]

    Chang, Q

    C.-I. Chang, Q. Du, Estimation of number of spectrally distinct signal sources in hyperspectral imagery, IEEE Transactions on geoscience and remote sensing 42 (2004) 608–619

    2004

  17. [20]

    Ambikapathi, T.-H

    A. Ambikapathi, T.-H. Chan, C.-Y. Chi, K. Keizer, Hyperspectral data geometry-based estimation of number of endmembers using p-norm- based pure pixel identification algorithm, IEEE Transactions on Geo- science and Remote Sensing 51 (2012) 2753–2769. 34

    2012

  18. [21]

    B. Luo, J. Chanussot, S. Dout´ e, L. Zhang, Empirical automatic esti- mation of the number of endmembers in hyperspectral images, IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters 10 (2012) 24–28

    2012

  19. [22]

    J. M. Bioucas-Dias, J. M. Nascimento, Hyperspectral subspace identifi- cation, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 46 (2008) 2435–2445

    2008

  20. [23]

    J. M. Nascimento, J. M. Dias, Vertex component analysis: A fast algo- rithm to unmix hyperspectral data, IEEE transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 43 (2005) 898–910

    2005

  21. [24]

    M. E. Winter, N-findr: An algorithm for fast autonomous spectral end- member determination in hyperspectral data, in: Imaging Spectrometry V, volume 3753, SPIE, 1999, pp. 266–275

    1999

  22. [25]

    Chang, C.-C

    C.-I. Chang, C.-C. Wu, W. Liu, Y.-C. Ouyang, A new growing method for simplex-based endmember extraction algorithm, IEEE transactions on geoscience and remote sensing 44 (2006) 2804–2819

    2006

  23. [26]

    J. W. Boardman, F. A. Kruse, R. O. Green, Mapping target signatures via partial unmixing of aviris data, NASA Technical Report (1995)

    1995

  24. [27]

    Berman, H

    M. Berman, H. Kiiveri, R. Lagerstrom, A. Ernst, R. Dunne, J. F. Hunt- ington, Ice: A statistical approach to identifying endmembers in hyper- spectral images, IEEE transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 42 (2004) 2085–2095

    2004

  25. [28]

    J. C. Harsanyi, C.-I. Chang, Hyperspectral image classification and dimensionality reduction: An orthogonal subspace projection approach, IEEE Transactions on geoscience and remote sensing 32 (1994) 779–785

    1994

  26. [29]

    Y. Qian, S. Jia, J. Zhou, A. Robles-Kelly, Hyperspectral unmixing via l {1/2} sparsity-constrained nonnegative matrix factorization, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 49 (2011) 4282–4297

    2011

  27. [30]

    J. Yao, D. Meng, Q. Zhao, W. Cao, Z. Xu, Nonconvex-sparsity and nonlocal-smoothness-based blind hyperspectral unmixing, IEEE Trans- actions on Image Processing 28 (2019) 2991–3006. 35

    2019

  28. [31]

    J. M. Bioucas-Dias, A variable splitting augmented lagrangian approach to linear spectral unmixing, in: 2009 First workshop on hyperspectral image and signal processing: Evolution in remote sensing, IEEE, 2009, pp. 1–4

    2009

  29. [32]

    J. Li, A. Agathos, D. Zaharie, J. M. Bioucas-Dias, A. Plaza, X. Li, Mini- mum volume simplex analysis: A fast algorithm for linear hyperspectral unmixing, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 53 (2015) 5067–5082

    2015

  30. [33]

    Dobigeon, S

    N. Dobigeon, S. Moussaoui, M. Coulon, J.-Y. Tourneret, A. O. Hero, Joint bayesian endmember extraction and linear unmixing for hyper- spectral imagery, IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing 57 (2009) 4355–4368

    2009

  31. [34]

    A. Zare, P. Gader, Pce: Piecewise convex endmember detection, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 48 (2010) 2620–2632

    2010

  32. [35]

    X. Xu, J. Li, C. Wu, A. Plaza, Regional clustering-based spatial pre- processing for hyperspectral unmixing, Remote Sensing of Environment 204 (2018) 333–346

    2018

  33. [36]

    Plaza, P

    A. Plaza, P. Martinez, R. P´ erez, J. Plaza, Spatial/spectral endmember extraction by multidimensional morphological operations, IEEE trans- actions on geoscience and remote sensing 40 (2002) 2025–2041

    2002

  34. [37]

    D. M. Rogge, B. Rivard, J. Zhang, A. Sanchez, J. Harris, J. Feng, In- tegration of spatial–spectral information for the improved extraction of endmembers, Remote Sensing of Environment 110 (2007) 287–303

    2007

  35. [38]

    Zortea, A

    M. Zortea, A. Plaza, Spatial preprocessing for endmember extraction, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 47 (2009) 2679– 2693

    2009

  36. [39]

    Iordache, J

    M.-D. Iordache, J. M. Bioucas-Dias, A. Plaza, Total variation spatial regularization for sparse hyperspectral unmixing, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 50 (2012) 4484–4502

    2012

  37. [40]

    J. M. Bioucas-Dias, M. A. Figueiredo, Alternating direction algorithms for constrained sparse regression: Application to hyperspectral unmix- ing, in: 2010 2nd Workshop on Hyperspectral Image and Signal Pro- cessing: Evolution in Remote Sensing, IEEE, 2010, pp. 1–4. 36

    2010

  38. [41]

    Iordache, J

    M.-D. Iordache, J. M. Bioucas-Dias, A. Plaza, Collaborative sparse regression for hyperspectral unmixing, IEEE Transactions on geoscience and remote sensing 52 (2013) 341–354

    2013

  39. [42]

    Iordache, J

    M.-D. Iordache, J. M. Bioucas-Dias, A. Plaza, B. Somers, Music-csr: Hyperspectral unmixing via multiple signal classification and collabora- tive sparse regression, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 52 (2013) 4364–4382

    2013

  40. [43]

    Heylen, D

    R. Heylen, D. Burazerovic, P. Scheunders, Non-linear spectral unmixing by geodesic simplex volume maximization, IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing 5 (2010) 534–542

    2010

  41. [44]

    Shkuratov, L

    Y. Shkuratov, L. Starukhina, H. Hoffmann, G. Arnold, A model of spec- tral albedo of particulate surfaces: Implications for optical properties of the moon, Icarus 137 (1999) 235–246

    1999

  42. [45]

    Broadwater, A

    J. Broadwater, A. Banerjee, A comparison of kernel functions for inti- mate mixture models, in: 2009 First Workshop on Hyperspectral Image and Signal Processing: Evolution in Remote Sensing, IEEE, 2009, pp. 1–4

    2009

  43. [46]

    Broadwater, R

    J. Broadwater, R. Chellappa, A. Banerjee, P. Burlina, Kernel fully con- strained least squares abundance estimates, in: 2007 IEEE international geoscience and remote sensing symposium, IEEE, 2007, pp. 4041–4044

    2007

  44. [47]

    Broadwater, A

    J. Broadwater, A. Banerjee, Mapping intimate mixtures using an adap- tive kernel-based technique, in: 2011 3rd Workshop on Hyperspectral Image and Signal Processing: Evolution in Remote Sensing (WHIS- PERS), IEEE, 2011, pp. 1–4

    2011

  45. [48]

    J. Chen, C. Richard, P. Honeine, Nonlinear unmixing of hyperspec- tral data based on a linear-mixture/nonlinear-fluctuation model, IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing 61 (2012) 480–492

    2012

  46. [49]

    D. Hong, N. Yokoya, J. Chanussot, X. X. Zhu, An augmented linear mixing model to address spectral variability for hyperspectral unmixing, IEEE Transactions on Image Processing 28 (2018) 1923–1938

    2018

  47. [50]

    R. A. Borsoi, T. Imbiriba, J. C. M. Bermudez, C. Richard, J. Chanussot, L. Drumetz, J.-Y. Tourneret, A. Zare, C. Jutten, Spectral variability in 37 hyperspectral data unmixing: A comprehensive review, IEEE geoscience and remote sensing magazine 9 (2021) 223–270

    2021

  48. [51]

    Drumetz, M.-A

    L. Drumetz, M.-A. Veganzones, S. Henrot, R. Phlypo, J. Chanussot, C. Jutten, Blind hyperspectral unmixing using an extended linear mix- ing model to address spectral variability, IEEE Transactions on Image Processing 25 (2016) 3890–3905

    2016

  49. [56]

    C. Li, B. Zhang, D. Hong, X. Jia, A. Plaza, J. Chanussot, Learning disentangled priors for hyperspectral anomaly detection: A coupling model-driven and data-driven paradigm, IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems 36 (2024) 6883–6896

    2024

  50. [57]

    C. Li, D. Hong, B. Zhang, Y. Li, G. Camps-Valls, X. X. Zhu, J. Chanus- sot, Urbansam: Learning invariance-inspired adapters for segment any- thing models in urban construction, arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.15199 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  51. [58]

    S. Li, W. Song, L. Fang, Y. Chen, P. Ghamisi, J. A. Benediktsson, Deep learning for hyperspectral image classification: An overview, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 57 (2019) 6690–6709. doi:10.1109/TGRS.2019.2907932. 38

    2019

  52. [60]

    Cressie, Statistics for spatial data, John Wiley & Sons, 2015

    N. Cressie, Statistics for spatial data, John Wiley & Sons, 2015

    2015

  53. [61]

    B. Xie, L. Wu, W. Mao, S. Zhou, S. Liu, An open integrated rock spec- tral library (rocksl) for a global sharing and matching service, Minerals 12 (2022) 118

    2022

  54. [62]

    Kokaly, R

    R. Kokaly, R. Clark, G. Swayze, K. Livo, T. Hoefen, N. Pearson, R. Wise, W. Benzel, H. Lowers, R. Driscoll, et al., Usgs spectral library version 7 data: Us geological survey data release [dataset], United States Geological Survey (USGS): Reston, V A, USA (2017)

    2017

  55. [63]

    A. M. Baldridge, S. J. Hook, C. Grove, G. Rivera, The aster spectral library version 2.0, Remote Sensing of Environment 113 (2009) 711–715

    2009

  56. [64]

    S. K. Meerdink, S. J. Hook, D. A. Roberts, E. A. Abbott, The ecostress spectral library version 1.0, Remote Sensing of Environment 230 (2019) 111196

    2019

  57. [65]

    P. R. Christensen, J. L. Bandfield, V. E. Hamilton, D. A. Howard, M. D. Lane, J. L. Piatek, S. W. Ruff, W. L. Stefanov, A thermal emission spec- tral library of rock-forming minerals, Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets 105 (2000) 9735–9739

    2000

  58. [66]

    Maturilli, J

    A. Maturilli, J. Helbert, L. Moroz, The berlin emissivity database (bed), Planetary and Space Science 56 (2008) 420–425

    2008

  59. [67]

    Loizeau, G

    D. Loizeau, G. Lequertier, F. Poulet, V. Hamm, C. Pilorget, L. Meslier- Lourit, C. Lantz, S. C. Werner, F. Rull, J.-P. Bibring, Planetary ter- restrial analogues library project: 2. building a laboratory facility for micromega characterization, Planetary and Space Science 193 ...

    2020

  60. [68]

    J. B. Percival, S. A. Bosman, E. G. Potter, J. M. Peter, A. B. Laudadio, A. C. Abraham, D. A. Shiley, C. Sherry, Customized spectral libraries for effective mineral exploration: mining national mineral collections, Clays and Clay Minerals 66 (2018) 297–314. 39

    2018

  61. [69]

    NASA Planetary Data System, Pds geosciences node spectral library [dataset], https://pds- geosciences.wustl.edu/spectrallibrary/default.htm, 2024

    2024

  62. [70]

    Swayze, R

    G. Swayze, R. N. Clark, F. Kruse, S. Sutley, A. Gallagher, Ground- truthing aviris mineral mapping at cuprite, nevada, 1992

    1992

  63. [71]

    G. A. Swayze, R. N. Clark, A. F. Goetz, K. E. Livo, G. N. Breit, F. A. Kruse, S. J. Sutley, L. W. Snee, H. A. Lowers, J. L. Post, et al., Map- ping advanced argillic alteration at cuprite, nevada, using imaging spec- troscopy, Economic geology 109 (2014) 1179–1221

    2014

  64. [72]

    R. N. Clark, G. A. Swayze, K. E. Livo, R. F. Kokaly, S. J. Sutley, J. B. Dalton, R. R. McDougal, C. A. Gent, Imaging spectroscopy: Earth and planetary remote sensing with the usgs tetracorder and expert systems, Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets 108 (2003)

    2003

  65. [73]

    MathWorks Image Processing Team, Hyperspec- tral imaging library for image processing toolbox, https://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/fileexchange/76796- hyperspectral-imaging-library-for-image-processing-toolbox, 2024

    2024

  66. [74]

    J. M. Nascimento, J. M. Dias, Does independent component analysis play a role in unmixing hyperspectral data?, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 43 (2005) 175–187

    2005

  67. [75]

    D. C. Heinz, et al., Fully constrained least squares linear spectral mix- ture analysis method for material quantification in hyperspectral im- agery, IEEE transactions on geoscience and remote sensing 39 (2001) 529–545

    2001

  68. [76]

    Murchie, R

    S. Murchie, R. Arvidson, P. Bedini, K. Beisser, J.-P. Bibring, J. Bishop, J. Boldt, P. Cavender, T. Choo, R. Clancy, et al., Compact reconnais- sance imaging spectrometer for mars (crism) on mars reconnaissance orbiter (mro), Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets 112 (2007)

    2007

  69. [77]

    Ceamanos, S

    X. Ceamanos, S. Dout´ e, B. Luo, F. Schmidt, G. Jouannic, J. Chanussot, Intercomparison and validation of techniques for spectral unmixing of hyperspectral images: A planetary case study, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 49 (2011) 4341–4358. 40

    2011

  70. [78]

    Bibring, A

    J.-P. Bibring, A. Soufflot, M. Berth´ e, Y. Langevin, B. Gondet, P. Drossart, M. Bouy´ e, M. Combes, P. Puget, A. Semery, et al., Omega: Observatoire pour la min´ eralogie, l’eau, les glaces et l’activit´ e, in: Mars Express: the scientific payload, volume 1240, 2004, pp. 37–49

    2004

  71. [79]

    J. Liu, B. Luo, S. Dout´ e, J. Chanussot, Exploration of planetary hyper- spectral images with unsupervised spectral unmixing: A case study of planet mars, Remote Sensing 10 (2018) 737

    2018

  72. [80]

    F. Zhu, Y. Wang, S. Xiang, B. Fan, C. Pan, Structured sparse method for hyperspectral unmixing, ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing 88 (2014) 101–118

    2014

  73. [81]

    P. A. White, H. Frye, M. F. Christensen, A. E. Gelfand, J. A. Silander, Spatial functional data modeling of plant reflectances, The Annals of Applied Statistics 16 (2022) 1919–1936

    2022

  74. [82]

    Zammit-Mangion, M

    A. Zammit-Mangion, M. D. Kaminski, B.-H. Tran, M. Filip- pone, N. Cressie, Spatial bayesian neural networks, 2024. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2311.09491. arXiv:2311.09491. 41

    2024 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.