[GRASS-dev] i.segment: Invalid region id -1

[Markus Metz]

Nikos Alexandris wrote:
> Markus M:
>> > >> > But it does not make sense to use a pan band as seeds when segmenting
>> > >> > the other bands. Seeds are typically the result of a previous run of
>> > >> > i.segment or the result of a previous classification of the same
>> > >> > data.
>
> Nikos A:
>> > >> Then I have inserted a small mistake in my tests/workflow. Wanted to
>> > >> drive "finer objects" (from Pan) in bigger ones (based on MS).
>> > >> Will adjust.
>
> MM:
>> > The seeds map does the opposite. You probably want to do pansharpening
>> > first.
>
> NA:
>> Ha-Yey :D  I did (in some cases).
>
> Just for completeness, ehm... I was too fast. So, I did use sharpenned images
> only in 2 trials, however, as I can actually see in the history.  The exact
> same process in two different Mapsets (same Location), QuickBird2 data:
>
> --%<--
> i.segment msx_hpf out=segments_msx_hpf_seeded_t0.02 threshold=0.02 minsize=4
> seed=segments_pan_t0.01 memory=3000 iterations=1000
> -->%--
>
>
> It worked in one case (repeated to be sure) and it failed in another!

Different computational regions?

> In the
> failing case, before the ERROR message, there are multiple WARNINGS issued:
>
> ..
> WARNING: Region consists of only one cell, nothing to update

This should not happen, a bug in the region growing algorithm.

>
> Now, I have re-ran the "failed" one and I get this strange:
>
> ..
> 0..5..10..15..20..25..30..35..40..ERROR: Invalid region id -1489

Essentially the same like "ERROR: Invalid region id -1". Again, this
should not happen.

> ..
>
> I went after looking all of the details of the involved maps.  The only
> "strange" thing I can see (which I caused) is that the region is 0.6, the seed
> (segments_pan_t0.01) is also 0.6 while the group of Pan-Sharpened images are
> (each) of 0.60017817 (ns) x 0.60016801 (we) resolution.  Is this my mistake?
> The resolution(s) should be identical, right?

Yes. I guess in the process of pansharpening, the region was set to
0.6, then the resolution was adjusted to the extents (for g.region,
extents have precedence over resolution). The correct way of adjusting
the region would be to either set the region to the pan band or align
the region to the band band (g.region align=pan). Note that g.region
res=0.6 -a can introduce a pixel shift.

Can you reproduce that with sample data? Or give me chance to reproduce that?

Markus M