Table 4 Performance comparison of the proposed HSICNet with recent deep learning models.
Model | Dataset | OA (%) | AA (%) | Kappa | F1-score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
3D CNN | Indian Pines | 94.23 | 93.11 | 0.92 | 0.927 |
ResNet18 | Indian Pines | 95.60 | 94.75 | 0.94 | 0.943 |
3D CNN + SE Attention | Indian Pines | 96.83 | 95.69 | 0.96 | 0.962 |
HSICNet | Indian Pines | 98.63 | 97.42 | 0.98 | 0.976 |
3D CNN | Pavia University | 96.74 | 95.88 | 0.95 | 0.956 |
ResNet18 | Pavia University | 97.21 | 96.11 | 0.96 | 0.961 |
3D CNN + SE Attention | Pavia University | 97.95 | 97.07 | 0.97 | 0.972 |
HSICNet | Pavia University | 99.14 | 98.30 | 0.99 | 0.986 |
3D CNN | Salinas | 97.11 | 96.44 | 0.96 | 0.964 |
ResNet18 | Salinas | 97.45 | 96.73 | 0.96 | 0.967 |
3D CNN + SE Attention | Salinas | 98.20 | 97.81 | 0.98 | 0.979 |
HSICNet | Salinas | 99.35 | 98.91 | 0.99 | 0.991 |