Research Article
Hyperspectral Image Classification with Optimized Compressed Synergic Deep Convolution Neural Network with Aquila Optimization
Table 4
HSI categorization for the Houston U dataset.
| Methods | RNN | DCNN | SDCNN | CSDCNN | CSDCNN-AO |
| OA | 49.23 ± 1.45 | 57.49 ± 1.39 | 88.73 ± 1.13 | 93.78 ± 0.86 | 94.67 ± 1.08 | AA | 78.20 ± 1.06 | 49.60 ± 3.29 | 88.46 ± 1.17 | 83.14 ± 1.11 | 94.44 ± 1.82 | K | 53.97 ± 0.58 | 51.04 ± 1.03 | 89.62 ± 2.54 | 89.13 ± 0.26 | 97.33 ± 1.25 | 1 | 27.89 ± 1.09 | 1.66 ± 7.33 | 92.00 ± 1.03 | 37.21 ± 30.0 | 94.77 ± 11.6 | 2 | 49.46 ± 5.00 | 42.87 ± 3.04 | 89.79 ± 2.80 | 82.69 ± 0.26 | 92.56 ± 4.87 | 3 | 26.69 ± 2.61 | 30.91 ± 8.28 | 87.18 ± 7.24 | 75.93 ± 1.26 | 90.06 ± 4.53 | 4 | 22.79 ± 9.7 | 21.17 ± 3.25 | 83.17 ± 5.52 | 89.11 ± 1.12 | 96.84 ± 4.89 | 5 | 37.71 ± 6.67 | 69.79 ± 2.13 | 86.75 ± 2.55 | 79.28 ± 1.34 | 95.65 ± 1.95 | 6 | 88.79 ± 1.71 | 92.78 ± 0.78 | 88.08 ± 3.06 | 93.82 ± 0.32 | 98.95 ± 0.96 | 7 | 38.54 ± 11.4 | 20.85 ± 7.59 | 72.89 ± 29.7 | 40.69 ± 2.13 | 92.48 ± 24.0 | 8 | 89.96 ± 2.15 | 88.84 ± 3.15 | 84.25 ± 2.40 | 99.33 ± 0.31 | 86.11 ± 3.09 | 9 | 57.81 ± 19.04 | 0.00 ± 0.00 | 76.0 ± 49.0 | 28.00 ± 2.05 | 99.72 ± 8.38 | 10 | 67.46 ± 1.91 | 67.53 ± 1.24 | 90.47 ± 6.87 | 87.28 ± 0.89 | 95.30 ± 2.86 | 11 | 82.56 ± 3.49 | 73.88 ± 4.33 | 94.57 ± 5.03 | 95.21 ± 0.23 | 99.84 ± 3.29 | 12 | 54.14 ± 5.56 | 48.46 ± 3.85 | 77.47 ± 5.16 | 92.77 ± 3.37 | 92.56 ± 3.44 | 13 | 34.47 ± 7.17 | 83.02 ± 1.22 | 97.26 ± 5.29 | 49.93 ± 3.56 | 97.89 ± 0.87 | 14 | 84.32 ± 8.95 | 93.94 ± 2.59 | 89.16 ± 2.22 | 95.89 ± 1.37 | 95.89 ± 2.57 | 15 | 48.75 ± 5.12 | 47.64 ± 4.56 | 98.00 ± 7.49 | 96.77 ± 2.98 | 93.74 ± 2.65 |
|
|