2017 IEEE Global Humanitarian Technology Conference (GHTC) 2017
DOI: 10.1109/ghtc.2017.8239286
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Damage identification and assessment using image processing on post-disaster satellite imagery

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The model learned these differences between pre-and post-disaster images as the image features for detecting the change. In previous studies, such as those presented by Joshi et al [31], only pre-disaster imagery was used for flood detection.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The model learned these differences between pre-and post-disaster images as the image features for detecting the change. In previous studies, such as those presented by Joshi et al [31], only pre-disaster imagery was used for flood detection.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Bagging is the term used to describe the convergence of decision trees. The researchers of [29] utilized a random forest to identify post-disaster alterations. Likewise, the researchers of [30] were employed to identify building issues.…”
Section: State-of-the-artmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The spatial distributions of the RF and the SVM-based assessment maps showed a similar correlation coefficient, was indicated that the classification capacity of the two methods is similar in the majority of cases. Joshi et al introduced a methodology for detection of damage post disasters by examining the textural features from high resolution aerial imagery [59]. The proposed technique considered DT, NB, SVM, RF, Voting Classifier and Adaptive Booster, and were compared to identify damaged regions from aerial images using only pre-event images as the input.…”
Section: Emergency Evaluationmentioning
confidence: 99%