The growing availability of spatial data from remote sensing, laser scanning (LiDAR), and photogrammetric techniques stimulates the dynamic development of methods for the automatic detection and classification of topographic objects. In recent years, both classical machine learning (ML) algorithms and deep learning (DL) methods have found wide application in the analysis of large and complex data sets. Despite significant achievements, literature on the subject remains scattered, and a comprehensive review that systematically compares algorithm classes with respect to data modality, performance, and application context is still needed. The aim of this article is to provide a critical analysis of the current state of research on the use of ML and DL algorithms in the detection and classification of topographic objects. The theoretical foundations of selected methods, their applications to various data sources, and the accuracy and computational requirements reported in the literature are presented. Attention is paid to comparing classical ML algorithms (including SVM, RF, KNN) with modern deep architectures (CNN, U-Net, ResNet), with respect to different data types such as satellite imagery, aerial orthophotos, and LiDAR point clouds, indicating their effectiveness in the context of cartographic and elevation data. The article also discusses the main challenges related to data availability, model interpretability, and computational costs, and points to promising directions for further research. The summary of the results shows that DL methods are frequently reported to achieve several to over ten percentage points higher segmentation and classification accuracy than classical ML approaches, depending on data type and object complexity, particularly in the analysis of raster data and LiDAR point clouds. The conclusions emphasize the practical significance of these methods for spatial planning, infrastructure monitoring, and environmental management, as well as their potential in the automation of topographic analysis.
Kryzia et al. (Tue,) studied this question.