{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.022636484687083888, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.163934426229508, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A comparison of AVIRIS and Landsat for land use classification at the urban fringe

In this study we tested whether AVIRIS data allowed for improved land use classification over synthetic Landsat ETM+ data for a location on the urban-rural fringe of Colorado. After processing the AVIRIS image and creating a synthetic Landsat image, we used standard classification and post-classification procedures to compare the data sources for land use mapping. We found that, for this location, AVIRIS holds modest, but real, advantages over Landsat for the classification of heterogeneous and vegetated land uses. Furthermore, this advantage comes almost entirely from the large number of sensor spectral bands rather than the high Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR).