Sparse Representation-Based SAR Image Target Classification on the 10-Class MSTAR Data Set
Source abstract
Abstract
Recent years have witnessed an ever-mounting interest in the research of sparse representation. The framework, Sparse Representation-based Classification (SRC), has been widely applied as a classifier in numerous domains, among which Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) target recognition is really challenging because it still is an open problem to interpreting the SAR image. In this paper, SRC is utilized to classify a 10-class moving and stationary target acquisition and recognition (MSTAR) target, which is a standard SAR data set. Before the classification, the sizes of the images need to be normalized to maintain the useful information, target and shadow, and to suppress the speckle noise. Specifically, a preprocessing method is recommended to extract the feature vectors of the image, and the feature vectors of the test samples can be represented by the sparse linear combination of basis vectors generated by the feature vectors of the training samples. Then the sparse representation is solved by l 1 -norm minimization. Finally, the identities of the test samples are inferred by the reconstructive errors calculated through the sparse coefficient. Experimental results demonstrate the good performance of SRC. Additionally, the average recognition rate under different feature spaces and the recognition rate of each target are discussed.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Sparse and Compressive Sensing Techniques · Advanced SAR Imaging Techniques · Image Processing Techniques and Applications
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
College of Electronic Science and Engineering, National University of Defense Technology, Changsha 410073, China
References (21)
Show source-provided references
1. Thiagarajan, J., Ramamurthy, K., Knee, P.P., Spanias, A., and Berisha, V. (2010, January 3–5). Sparse representation for automatic target classification in SAR images. Proceedings of Communications, Control and Signal Processing (ISCCSP), 2010 4th International Symposium on, Limassol, Cyprus.10.1109/ISCCSP.2010.5463416 ↗
2. Template-based SAR ATR performance using different image enhancement techniques10.1117/12.357648 ↗
3. Patnaik, R., and Casasent, D.P. (2006, January 17). MSTAR object classification and confuser and clutter rejection using minace filters. Proceedings of Automatic Target Recognition XVI, Orlando, FL, USA.10.1117/12.663127 ↗
4. Marinelli, M.P., Kaplan, L.M., and Nasrabadi, N.M. (1999, January 5). SAR ATR using a modified learning vector quantization algorithm. Proceedings of the SPIE Algorithms for Synthetic Aperture Radar Imagery VI, Orlando, FL, USA.10.1117/12.357651 ↗
5. Yuan, C., and Casasent, D. (2005, January 28). A new SVM for distorted SAR object classification. Proceedings of the SPIE Conference on Optical Pattern Recognition XVI, Orlando, FL, USA.10.1117/12.607979 ↗
6. Huang, J.B., and Yang, M.H. (2010, January 13–18). Fast sparse representation with prototype. Proceedings of the IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR 2010), San Francisco, CA, USA.10.1109/CVPR.2010.5539919 ↗
7. Shin, Y., Lee, S., Woo, S., and Lee, H. (, 2013). Performance increase by using an EEG sparse representation based classification method. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Consumer Electronics, Las Vegas, NV, USA.
8. Huang, X., Wang, P., Zhang, B., and Qiao, H. (2013, January 20–22). SAR target recognition using block-sparse representation. Proceedings of the International Conference on Mechatronic Sciences, Electric Engineering and Computer, Shengyang, China.
9. Sparse representation of monogenic signal: With application to target recognition in SAR images10.1109/LSP.2014.2321565 ↗
10. Xing, X., Ji, K., Zou, H., and Sun, J. (2014). SAR vehicle recognition based on sparse representation along with aspect angle. Sci. World J., 2014.10.1155/2014/834140 ↗
11. Pati, Y.C., Rezaiifar, R., and Krishnaprasad, P.S. (1993, January 1–3). Orthogonal matching pursuit: Recursive function approximation with applications to wavelet decomposition. Proceedings of the Conference Record of The Twenty-Seventh Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems, and Computers, Pacific Grove, CA, USA.
12. Orthogonal least squares methods and their application to non-linear system identification10.1080/00207178908953472 ↗
13. Candes, E., and Romberg, J. l1-magic: Recovery of sparse signals via convex programming. California Institute of Technology. Available online: http://thesis-text-naim-mansour.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/ThesisText/Thesis%20backup/Literatuur/Optimization%20techniques/l1magic.pdf.
14. Robust face recognition via sparse representation10.1109/TPAMI.2008.79 ↗
15. Patnaik, R., and Casasent, D.P. (2007, January 9). SAR classification and confuser and clutter rejection tests on MSTAR 10-class data using minace filters. Proceedings of the Optical Pattern Recognition XVIII, (SPIE 6574, 657402), Orlando, FL, USA.10.1117/12.717318 ↗
16. Yuan, C., and Casasent, D. (2006, January 17). MSTAR 10-class classification and confuser and clutter rejection using SVRDM. Proceedings of the Optical Pattern Recognition XVII, (SPIE 6245, 624501), Orlando, FL, USA.10.1117/12.662152 ↗
17. Moving and Stationary Target Acquisition and Recognition (MSTAR) Public Release Data. Available online: https://www.sdms.afrl.af.mil/datasets/matar/.
18. Ross, T., Worrell, S., Velten, V., Mossing, J., and Bryant, M. (1998, January 13). Stardard SAR ATR evaluation experiments using the MSTAR public release data set. Proceedings of the SPIE on Algorithms for SAR, Orlando, FL, USA.10.1117/12.321859 ↗
19. Characterization and statistical modeling of phase in single-channel synthetic aperture radar imagery10.1109/TAES.2015.140711 ↗
20. LIBSVM: A library for support vector machines10.1145/1961189.1961199 ↗
21. Mathworks. Regionprops. Available online: http://tinyurl.com/k58dlqf.