Skip to content


  • Research Article
  • Open Access

Spectral Content Characterization for Efficient Image Detection Algorithm Design

EURASIP Journal on Advances in Signal Processing20072007:082874

  • Received: 8 August 2006
  • Accepted: 30 January 2007
  • Published:


This paper presents spectral characterization for efficient image detection using hyperspectral processing techniques. We investigate the relationship between the number of used bands and the performance of the detection process in order to find the optimal number of band reductions. The band reduction significantly reduces computation and implementation complexity of the algorithms. Specifically, we define and characterize the contribution coefficient for each band. Based on the coefficients, we heuristically select the required minimum bands for the detection process. We have shown that the small number of bands is efficient for effective detection. The proposed algorithm is suitable for low-complexity and real-time applications.


  • Information Technology
  • Quantum Information
  • Optimal Number
  • Detection Algorithm
  • Processing Technique

Authors’ Affiliations

Mobile Systems Design Laboratory, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Stony Brook University – SUNY, Stony Brook, NY, 11794-2350, US
Department of Industrial and Information Systems Engineering, Ajou University, Suwon-Si, 442-749, South Korea
Humintec Co. Ltd, Suwon-Si, 443-749, South Korea
Department of Electronics Engineering, College of Information Technology, Ajou University, Suwon-Si, 442-749, South Korea


  1. Boggs T, Gomez RB: Fast hyperspectral data processing methods. Geo-Spatial Image and Data Exploitation II, April 2001, Orlando, Calif, USA, Proceedings of SPIE 4383: 74–78.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  2. Gomez RB, Lewis AJ: On-board processing for spectral remote sensing. ISPRS Special Session Future Intelligent Earth Observing Satellites (FIEOS '02), November 2002, Denver, Colo, USAGoogle Scholar
  3. Chai SM, Gentile A, Lugo-Beauchamp WE, Fonseca J, Cruz-Rivera JL, Wills DS: Forcal-plane processing architectures for real-time hyperspectral image processing. Applied Optics 2000,39(5):835-849. 10.1364/AO.39.000835View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  4. Shaw GA, Burke HK: Spectral imaging for remote sensing. Lincoln Laboratory Journal 2003,14(1):3-28.Google Scholar
  5. Nascimento SMC, Ferreira FP, Foster DH: Statistics of spatial cone-excitation ratios in natural scenes. Journal of the Optical Society of America A 2002,19(8):1484-1490. 10.1364/JOSAA.19.001484View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  6. Gonzalez RC, Woods RE: Digital Image Processing. 2nd edition. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA; 2002.Google Scholar
  7. Bakker WH, Schmidt KS: Hyperspectral edge filtering for measuring homogeneity of surface cover types. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing 2002,56(4):246-256. 10.1016/S0924-2716(02)00060-6View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  8. Nischan ML, Joseph RM, Libby JC, Kerekes JP: Active spectral imaging. Lincoln Laboratory Journal 2003,14(1):131-144.Google Scholar
  9. Griffin MK, Burke HK: Compensation of hyperspectral data for atmospheric effects. Lincoln Laboratory Journal 2003,14(1):29-54.Google Scholar
  10. Abousleman GP, Marcellin MW, Hunt BR: Hyperspectral image compression using entropy-constrained predictive trellis coded quantization. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing 1997,6(4):566-573. 10.1109/83.563321View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  11. Keshava N: Distance metrics and band selection in hyperspectral processing with applications to material identification and spectral libraries. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 2004,42(7):1552-1565.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  12. Bajcsy P, Groves P: Methodology for hyperspectral band selection. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 2004,70(7):793-802.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  13. Kumar S, Ghosh J, Crawford MM: Best-bases feature extraction algorithms for classification of hyperspectral data. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 2001,39(7):1368-1379. 10.1109/36.934070View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  14. Girouard G, Bannari A, Harti A, Desrochers A: Validated spectral angle mapper algorithm for geological mapping: comparative study between quickbird and landsat-tm. The 20th International Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing Congress, July 2004, Istanbul, Turkey 599–605.Google Scholar
  15. Chassaing R: Digital Signal Processing and Applications with the C6713 and C6416 DSK. John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, USA; 2005.Google Scholar
  16. Texas Instrument : Datasheet of TMS320C6713B. 2005. Scholar


© Kyoung-Su Park et al. 2007

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.