Joint Background-Anomaly-Noise Decomposition for Robust Hyperspectral Anomaly Detection via Constrained Convex Optimization
About
We propose a novel hyperspectral (HS) anomaly detection method that is robust to various types of noise. Most existing HS anomaly detection methods are designed without explicit consideration of noise or are based on the assumption of Gaussian noise. However, in real-world situations, observed HS images are often degraded by various types of noise, such as sparse noise and stripe noise, due to sensor failure or calibration errors, significantly affecting the detection performance. To address this problem, this article establishes a robust HS anomaly detection method with a mechanism that can properly remove mixed noise while separating background and anomaly parts. Specifically, we newly formulate a constrained convex optimization problem to decompose background and anomaly parts, and three types of noise from a given HS image. Then, we develop an efficient algorithm based on a preconditioned variant of a primal-dual splitting method to solve this problem. Experimental results using seven real HS datasets demonstrate that the proposed method achieves detection accuracy comparable to state-of-the-art methods on original images and exhibits significantly higher robustness in scenarios where various types of mixed noise are added.
Related benchmarks
| Task | Dataset | Result | Rank | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hyperspectral Anomaly Detection | Hyperion | Running Time (s)1.9766 | 25 | |
| Hyperspectral Anomaly Detection | Pavia (test) | AUC (D, F)0.991 | 14 | |
| Hyperspectral Anomaly Detection | Pavia Centre Case 4 Mixed Noise Condition | AUC (PD, PF)99.04 | 14 | |
| Hyperspectral Anomaly Detection | Texas Coast Mixed Noise Condition (Case 4) | AUC (PD vs PF)99.78 | 14 | |
| Hyperspectral Anomaly Detection | Gainesville Mixed Noise Condition (Case 4) | AUC (PD vs PF)99.52 | 14 | |
| Hyperspectral Anomaly Detection | Los Angeles Mixed Noise Condition II (Case 4) | AUC (PD vs PF)0.9881 | 14 | |
| Hyperspectral Anomaly Detection | San Diego Mixed Noise Condition (Case 4) | AUC (PD vs PF)98.67 | 14 | |
| Hyperspectral Anomaly Detection | Hyperion Mixed Noise Condition (Case 4) | AUC (PD vs PF)0.9977 | 14 | |
| Hyperspectral Anomaly Detection | Texas Coast Case 2 | AUC (PD vs PF)0.9972 | 14 | |
| Hyperspectral Anomaly Detection | Gainesville Case 2 | AUC (PD vs PF)99.51 | 14 |