[GRASS-user] A problem with i.gensigset.
Nikos Alexandris
nikos.alexandris at felis.uni-freiburg.de
Tue Apr 6 14:14:48 EDT 2010
On Tue, 2010-04-06 at 20:44 +0300, Micha Silver wrote:
> joel dinis wrote:
>
> > Hello Micha,
> >
> > I put r.info <http://r.info/> -r amostras
> > as sugested, get the following:
> > min=112
> > max=512
> >
> So, if I understand correctly, you are trying to classify into 400
> separate classes?!
> I'm a beginner with image classification, and others with more
> experience will know better, but I'll bet that's your problem. There
> must be many separate training areas (with different cat values) with a
> very similar spectral signature, and the algorithm is not able to
> differentiate between them.
I 've also thought about that Micha (I was about to suggest Joel to use
less training classes), but I was hesitant to say it :-p
Nikos
>
> > (This values are index to my classes.)
> >
> > JD
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 4:39 PM, Micha Silver <micha at arava.co.il
> > <mailto:micha at arava.co.il>> wrote:
> >
> > Nikos Alexandris wrote:
> >
> > (sorry for re-sorting the message, just to keep it easy to
> > follow-up)
> >
> > joel dinis:
> >
> >
> > > I trying to classify remote sensing imagery, and
> > > I thought to try the i.smap module, but
> > > when I run the i.gensigset,
> >
> >
> >
> > Nikos Alexandris:
> >
> >
> > Please, could you copy-paste the exact command you
> > used?
> > Does the "maxsig=" (e.g. maxsig=20) make any
> > difference?
> >
> >
> >
> > joel dinis:
> >
> >
> >
> > In fact, I put maxsig=30.
> > i.gensigset trainingmap=amostras group=grupo subgroup=subgrupo
> > signaturefile=assinaturas maxsig=30
> >
> >
> >
> > What about smaller maxsig's, like:
> >
> > - maxsig=25
> > - maxsig=20
> > - maxsig=15
> >
> > ?
> >
> > Nikos
> >
> >
> >
> > Also it might help to know what is contained in the trainingmap. i.e:
> > r.info <http://r.info> -r amostras
> >
> >
> >
> > > I always
> > > get the same problem:
> > > ...
> > > Removed a singular subsignature number 1 (9 remain)
> > > Removed a singular subsignature number 1 (8 remain)
> > > Removed a singular subsignature number 1 (7 remain)
> > > Removed a singular subsignature number 1 (6 remain)
> > > Removed a singular subsignature number 1 (5 remain)
> > > Removed a singular subsignature number 1 (4 remain)
> > > Removed a singular subsignature number 1 (3 remain)
> > > Removed a singular subsignature number 1 (2 remain)
> > > Removed a singular subsignature number 1 (1 remain)
> > > Unreliable clustering. Try a smaller initial
> > number of
> > clusters
> > > Removed a singular subsignature number 1 (-1 remain)
> > > Unreliable clustering. Try a smaller initial
> > number of
> > clusters
> > > Number of subclasses is 0
> > > Clustering class 12 (184 pixels)...
> > > Removed a singular subsignature number 1 (9 remain)
> > > Removed a singular subsignature number 1 (8 remain)
> > > Removed a singular subsignature number 1 (7 remain)
> > > Removed a singular subsignature number 1 (6 remain)
> > > Removed a singular subsignature number 1 (5 remain)
> > > Removed a singular subsignature number 1 (4 remain)
> > > Removed a singular subsignature number 1 (3 remain)
> > > Removed a singular subsignature number 1 (2 remain)
> > > Removed a singular subsignature number 1 (1 remain)
> > > Unreliable clustering. Try a smaller initial
> > number of
> > clusters
> > > Removed a singular subsignature number 1 (-1 remain)
> > > Unreliable clustering. Try a smaller initial
> > number of
> > clusters
> > > Number of subclasses is 0
> > > i.gensigset complete.
> > >
> > > And afterwards the signature file doesn't have any
> > > spectral information. I really don't understand whats
> > happening
> > > and the cause to this outcome.
> > >
> > > Can anyone solve this "enigma"?
> > >
> > > Ps: I don't know if this information is important: I
> > collected
> > > about 450 samples distributed by 10 classes. I
> > may also
> > > add that the average number of pixels per sample
> > is around
> > 50.
> > >
> > > And thanks list, for the previous tips: they were
> > very
> > useful.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > grass-user mailing list
> > grass-user at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:grass-user at lists.osgeo.org>
> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user
> >
> > This mail was received via Mail-SeCure System.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Micha Silver
> > Arava Development Co. +972-52-3665918
> > http://www.surfaces.co.il
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > This mail was received via Mail-SeCure System.
>
>
More information about the grass-user
mailing list