| Literature DB >> 35002567 |
Yi Lv1,2, Zhengbo Yin3, Zhezhou Yu1.
Abstract
In order to improve the accuracy of remote sensing image target detection, this paper proposes a remote sensing image target detection algorithm DFS based on deep learning. Firstly, dimension clustering module, loss function, and sliding window segmentation detection are designed. The data set used in the experiment comes from GoogleEarth, and there are 6 types of objects: airplanes, boats, warehouses, large ships, bridges, and ports. Training set, verification set, and test set contain 73490 images, 22722 images, and 2138 images, respectively. It is assumed that the number of detected positive samples and negative samples is A and B, respectively, and the number of undetected positive samples and negative samples is C and D, respectively. The experimental results show that the precision-recall curve of DFS for six types of targets shows that DFS has the best detection effect for bridges and the worst detection effect for boats. The main reason is that the size of the bridge is relatively large, and it is clearly distinguished from the background in the image, so the detection difficulty is low. However, the target of the boat is very small, and it is easy to be mixed with the background, so it is difficult to detect. The MAP of DFS is improved by 12.82%, the detection accuracy is improved by 13%, and the recall rate is slightly decreased by 1% compared with YOLOv2. According to the number of detection targets, the number of false positives (FPs) of DFS is much less than that of YOLOv2. The false positive rate is greatly reduced. In addition, the average IOU of DFS is 11.84% higher than that of YOLOv2. For small target detection efficiency and large remote sensing image detection, the DFS algorithm has obvious advantages.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 35002567 PMCID: PMC8710154 DOI: 10.1155/2021/3474921
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Contrast Media Mol Imaging ISSN: 1555-4309 Impact factor: 3.161
Experimental indicators and their calculation methods.
| Index | Calculation method |
|---|---|
| Accuracy rate |
|
| Recall rate |
|
|
|
|
| Average precision |
|
Figure 1Precision-recall rate curves of large ships, bridges, and ports.
Figure 2Precision-recall rate curves of boats, airplanes, and warehouses.
Performance comparison between DFS and YOLOv2.
| Algorithm | Accuracy rate | Recall rate | Average IOU | mAP |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YOLOv2 | 72 | 55 | 55.70 | 50.17 |
| DFS | 85 | 54 | 67.54 | 62.99 |