Remote Sensing (Dec 2022)
A Rapid Self-Supervised Deep-Learning-Based Method for Post-Earthquake Damage Detection Using UAV Data (Case Study: Sarpol-e Zahab, Iran)
Abstract
Immediately after an earthquake, rapid disaster management is the main challenge for relevant organizations. While satellite images have been used in the past two decades for building-damage mapping, they have rarely been utilized for the timely damage monitoring required for rescue operations. Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) have recently become very popular due to their agile deployment to sites, super-high spatial resolution, and relatively low operating cost. This paper proposes a novel deep-learning-based method for rapid post-earthquake building damage detection. The method detects damages in four levels and consists of three steps. First, three different feature types—non-deep, deep, and their fusion—are investigated to determine the optimal feature extraction method. A “one-epoch convolutional autoencoder (OECAE)” is used to extract deep features from non-deep features. Then, a rule-based procedure is designed for the automatic selection of the proper training samples required by the classification algorithms in the next step. Finally, seven famous machine learning (ML) algorithms—including support vector machine (SVM), random forest (RF), gradient boosting (GB), extreme gradient boosting (XGB), decision trees (DT), k-nearest neighbors (KNN), and adaBoost (AB)—and a basic deep learning algorithm (i.e., multi-layer perceptron (MLP)) are implemented to obtain building damage maps. The results indicated that auto-training samples are feasible and superior to manual ones, with improved overall accuracy (OA) and kappa coefficient (KC) over 22% and 33%, respectively; SVM (OA = 82% and KC = 74.01%) was the most accurate AI model with a slight advantage over MLP (OA = 82% and KC = 73.98%). Additionally, it was found that the fusion of deep and non-deep features using OECAE could significantly enhance damage-mapping efficiency compared to those using either non-deep features (by an average improvement of 6.75% and 9.78% in OA and KC, respectively) or deep features (improving OA by 7.19% and KC by 10.18% on average) alone.
Keywords