scispace - formally typeset
M

Mikhail Kanevski

Researcher at University of Lausanne

Publications -  206
Citations -  4627

Mikhail Kanevski is an academic researcher from University of Lausanne. The author has contributed to research in topics: Support vector machine & Feature selection. The author has an hindex of 27, co-authored 203 publications receiving 3916 citations. Previous affiliations of Mikhail Kanevski include Intelligence and National Security Alliance & Maynooth University.

Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

Active Learning Methods for Remote Sensing Image Classification

TL;DR: Two active learning algorithms for semiautomatic definition of training samples in remote sensing image classification, based on predefined heuristics, are proposed, which reach the same level of accuracy as larger data sets.
Journal ArticleDOI

A Survey of Active Learning Algorithms for Supervised Remote Sensing Image Classification

TL;DR: The main families of active learning algorithms are reviewed and tested: committee, large margin, and posterior probability-based, which aims at building efficient training sets by iteratively improving the model performance through sampling.
Journal ArticleDOI

Supervised change detection in VHR images using contextual information and support vector machines

TL;DR: An effective solution to deal with supervised change detection in very high geometrical resolution (VHR) images is studied and the inclusion of spatial and contextual information issued from local textural statistics and mathematical morphology is proposed.
Journal ArticleDOI

Learning Relevant Image Features With Multiple-Kernel Classification

TL;DR: Experiments carried out in multi- and hyperspectral, contextual, and multisource remote sensing data classification confirm the capability of the method in ranking the relevant features and show the computational efficience of the proposed strategy.
Journal ArticleDOI

Machine Learning Feature Selection Methods for Landslide Susceptibility Mapping

TL;DR: The results of this study reveal the strengths of the classification algorithms, but evidence shows the need for relying on more than one method for the identification of relevant variables; the weakness of the adaptive scaling algorithm when used with landslide data; and the lack of additional features which characterize the spatial distribution of deep-seated landslides.