Research Article

Investigating the impact of spectral band upsampling on Sentinel-2 multispectral image classification

Volume: 8 March 25, 2026

Investigating the impact of spectral band upsampling on Sentinel-2 multispectral image classification

Abstract

Multispectral imaging sensors collect information about the reflectance characteristics of land-cover materials over multiple wavelengths of the electromagnetic spectrum. The sensor can be designed to have low or high spatial resolutions in different spectral bands, which significantly affects the reliability of classification accuracy results. This study investigates the effect of band upsampling, which increases low spatial resolution of a spectral band to high resolution, on the classification of Sentinel-2 multispectral data. Both traditional Bicubic Interpolation and deep learning-based DSen2 algorithms are utilized to increase the spatial resolution of spectral bands having 20m and 60m to 10m resolution. Then, random forest and support vector machines classifiers are used to classify the different band combinations. Experiments are realized on two real Sentinel-2 image datasets called SeasoNet covering different seasons such as fall, spring and summer. The quantitative results demonstrate that the highest classification accuracy values are achieved when the band combinations include the upsampled 20 m and 60 m bands, in addition to the original 10 m resolution bands. This improvement is observed consistently across all seasons when Bicubic Interpolation and DSen2 methods are utilized for upsampling. The qualitative results, on the other hand, demonstrate that upsampling with DSen2 yields visually superior images compared to the Bicubic Interpolation.

Keywords

References

  1. Baek, W. K., Lee, M. J., & Jung, H. S. (2024). Land cover classification from RGB and NIR satellite images using modified U-Net model. IEEE Access, 12, 69445–69455. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3401416
  2. Balçık, F. B. (2018). Evaluation of Sentinel-2 MSI data for land use / land cover classification using different vegetation indices. SUJEST, 6, 839–846. https://doi.org/10.15317/Scitech.2018.174
  3. Breiman, L. (2001). Random forests. Machine Learning, 45(1), 5–32. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010933404324
  4. Chang, C.-C., & Lin, C.-J. (2011). LIBSVM: A library for support vector machines. ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology, 2(3), 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1145/1961189.1961199
  5. Chaudhuri, U., Dey, S., Datcu, M., Banerjee, B., & Bhattacharya, A. (2021). Interband retrieval and classification using the multilabeled Sentinel-2 Bigearthnet archive. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing, 14, 9884–9898. https://doi.org/10.1109/JSTARS.2021.3112209
  6. Cheng, G., Han, J., & Lu, X. (2017). Remote sensing image scene classification: benchmark and state of the art. IEEE, 105(10), 1865–1883. https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2017.2675998
  7. Cliff, N. (1993). Dominance statistics: Ordinal methods for comparing groups. Psychological Bulletin, 114(3), 494–509. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0033-2909.114.3.494
  8. Cortes, C., & Vapnik V. (1995). Support-vector networks. Machine Learning, 20, 273-297. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00994018

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Image Processing , Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing

Journal Section

Research Article

Publication Date

March 25, 2026

Submission Date

June 30, 2025

Acceptance Date

November 4, 2025

Published in Issue

Year 2026 Volume: 8

APA
Dündar, T. (2026). Investigating the impact of spectral band upsampling on Sentinel-2 multispectral image classification. Turkish Journal of Remote Sensing, 8, 1-46. https://doi.org/10.51489/tuzal.1729306

 SCImago Journal & Country Rank             Flag Counter