Research Article

Robustness Evaluation of Hyperspectral Image Classification Models Using Degradation-Aware Metrics

Volume: 9 Number: 5 September 15, 2026
TR EN

Robustness Evaluation of Hyperspectral Image Classification Models Using Degradation-Aware Metrics

Abstract

Hyperspectral image classification studies are generally evaluated on clean benchmark datasets and often report high-accuracy values. However, because real sensor data can be affected by different degradations, such as Gaussian, impulse, stripe, dead-line, and mixed noise, clean-data performance alone may be insufficient to explain the reliability of models under practical conditions. In this study, SVM, k-NN, 1D-CNN, 2D-CNN, 3D-CNN, Hybrid CNN, Dense CNN, and a transformer-based model were evaluated on the Indian Pines, Pavia University, and Salinas datasets under controlled noise scenarios. The overall accuracy (OA), average accuracy (AA), kappa coefficient, and macro-F1 score were used as standard performance metrics. In addition, two robustness-oriented metrics, Relative Degradation Rate (RDR) and Robustness Score (RS), were used to measure noise-induced performance degradation more explicitly. The findings show that model rankings obtained on clean data may change under noisy conditions depending on the dataset and noise type. Performance degradation was more evident for some models, especially under mixed-severity and high-severity noise scenarios. Overall, the results indicate that hyperspectral classification models should be evaluated not only based on clean-data accuracy but also in terms of their robustness against different types of sensor noise.

Keywords

Ethical Statement

Ethics committee approval was not required for this study because no study on animals or humans was conducted.

References

  1. Ahmad, M., Butt, M. H. F., Usama, M., Altuwaijri, H. A., Mazzara, M., Distefano, S., & Khan, A. M. (2025). Multi-head spatial-spectral mamba for hyperspectral image classification. Remote Sensing Letters, 16(4), 339-353. https://doi.org/10.1080/2150704X.2025.2461330
  2. Ahmad, M., Shabbir, S., Roy, S. K., Hong, D., Wu, X., Yao, J., Khan, A. M., Mazzara, M., Distefano, S., & Chanussot, J. (2022). Hyperspectral image classification: Traditional to deep models: A survey for future prospects. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing, 15, 968-999. https://doi.org/10.1109/JSTARS.2021.3133021
  3. Bera, S., Shrivastava, V. K., & Satapathy, S. C. (2022). Advances in hyperspectral image classification based on convolutional neural networks: A review. Computer Modeling in Engineering & Sciences, 133(2), 219-250. https://doi.org/10.32604/cmes.2022.020601
  4. Bishop, C. M. (1995). Training with noise is equivalent to Tikhonov regularization. Neural Computation, 7(1), 108-116. https://doi.org/10.1162/neco.1995.7.1.108
  5. Bo, C., Lu, H., & Wang, D. (2018). Spectral-spatial K-nearest neighbor approach for hyperspectral image classification. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 77(9), 10419-10436. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-017-4403-9
  6. Ham, J., Chen, Y., Crawford, M. M., & Ghosh, J. (2005). Investigation of the random forest framework for classification of hyperspectral data. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 43(3), 492-501. https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2004.842481
  7. He, L., Li, J., Liu, C., & Li, S. (2018). Recent advances on spectral-spatial hyperspectral image classification: An overview and new guidelines. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 56(3), 1579-1597. https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2017.2765364
  8. Hendrycks, D., & Dietterich, T. (2019). Benchmarking neural network robustness to common corruptions and perturbations. International Conference on Learning Representations. https://openreview.net/forum?id=HJz6tiCqYm

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Geospatial Information Systems and Geospatial Data Modelling, Remote Sensing

Journal Section

Research Article

Publication Date

September 15, 2026

Submission Date

July 10, 2026

Acceptance Date

August 10, 2026

Published in Issue

Year 2026 Volume: 9 Number: 5

APA
Atılgan, C. (2026). Robustness Evaluation of Hyperspectral Image Classification Models Using Degradation-Aware Metrics. Black Sea Journal of Engineering and Science, 9(5), 2373-2392. https://doi.org/10.34248/bsengineering.1991363
AMA
1.Atılgan C. Robustness Evaluation of Hyperspectral Image Classification Models Using Degradation-Aware Metrics. BSJ Eng. Sci. 2026;9(5):2373-2392. doi:10.34248/bsengineering.1991363
Chicago
Atılgan, Cem. 2026. “Robustness Evaluation of Hyperspectral Image Classification Models Using Degradation-Aware Metrics”. Black Sea Journal of Engineering and Science 9 (5): 2373-92. https://doi.org/10.34248/bsengineering.1991363.
EndNote
Atılgan C (September 1, 2026) Robustness Evaluation of Hyperspectral Image Classification Models Using Degradation-Aware Metrics. Black Sea Journal of Engineering and Science 9 5 2373–2392.
IEEE
[1]C. Atılgan, “Robustness Evaluation of Hyperspectral Image Classification Models Using Degradation-Aware Metrics”, BSJ Eng. Sci., vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 2373–2392, Sept. 2026, doi: 10.34248/bsengineering.1991363.
ISNAD
Atılgan, Cem. “Robustness Evaluation of Hyperspectral Image Classification Models Using Degradation-Aware Metrics”. Black Sea Journal of Engineering and Science 9/5 (September 1, 2026): 2373-2392. https://doi.org/10.34248/bsengineering.1991363.
JAMA
1.Atılgan C. Robustness Evaluation of Hyperspectral Image Classification Models Using Degradation-Aware Metrics. BSJ Eng. Sci. 2026;9:2373–2392.
MLA
Atılgan, Cem. “Robustness Evaluation of Hyperspectral Image Classification Models Using Degradation-Aware Metrics”. Black Sea Journal of Engineering and Science, vol. 9, no. 5, Sept. 2026, pp. 2373-92, doi:10.34248/bsengineering.1991363.
Vancouver
1.Cem Atılgan. Robustness Evaluation of Hyperspectral Image Classification Models Using Degradation-Aware Metrics. BSJ Eng. Sci. 2026 Sep. 1;9(5):2373-92. doi:10.34248/bsengineering.1991363