Scale-dependent fractal dimensions of topographic surfaces: An empirical investigation, with applications in geomorphology and computer mapping

  • David M. Mark
  • Peter B. Aronson


Fractional Brownian surfaces have been widely discussed as an appropriate model for the statistical behavior of topographic surfaces. The fractals model proposes that topographic surfaces are statistically self-similar, and that a single parameter, the fractal dimension, applies at all scales. This paper presents the results of empirical examinations of 17 topographic samples. Only one of these samples shows the statistical behavior predicted by the fractals model; however, in 15 of the 17 samples, the surfaces' variograms could be adequately described by ranges of scales having constant fractal dimension, separated by distinct scale breaks. For scale ranges between adjacent breaks, surface behavior should be that predicted by the fractals model; the breaks represent characteristic horizontal scales, at which surface behavior changes substantially. These scale breaks are especially important for cartographic representations and digital elevation models, since they represent scales at which there is a distinct change in the relation between sampling interval and the associated error.

Key words

Fractals variograms topography stochastic models 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Allder, W. R., Caruso, V. M., Pearsall, R. A., and Troup, M. I., 1982, An overview of digital elevation model production at the United States Geological Survey: Proceedings, Fifth International Symposium on Computer-Assisted Catography (Auto-Carto 5), p. 23–32.Google Scholar
  2. Church, M. and Mark, D. M., 1980, On size and scale in geomorphology: Prog. Phys. Geog., v. 4, p. 342–390.Google Scholar
  3. Dutton, G. H., 1981, Fractal enhancement of cartographic line detail: Amer. Cartog., v. 8, p. 23–40.Google Scholar
  4. Evans, I. S., 1972, General geomorphometry, derivatives of altitude, and description statistics,in, Chorley, R. J. (Ed.), Spatial analysis in geomorphology: Methuen & Co., London, p. 17–90.Google Scholar
  5. Evans, I. S., 1979, An integrated system of terrain analysis and slope mapping: Final Report on U.S. Army Grant DA-ERO-591-73-g0040, Department of Geography, University of Durham, England, 192 pp.Google Scholar
  6. Fournier, A., Fussell, D., and Carpenter, L., 1982a, Computer rendering of stochastic models: Comm. ACM, v. 25, p. 371–384.Google Scholar
  7. Fournier, A., Fussell, D., and Carpenter, L., 1982b, Authors' reply to: Comment on computer rendering of fractal stochastic models (by B. B. Mandelbrot): Commun. ACM, v. 25, p. 583–584.Google Scholar
  8. Freiberger, W., and Grenander, U., 1977, Surface patterns in theoretical geography: Comput. Geosci., v. 3, p. 547–578.Google Scholar
  9. Goodchild, M. F., 1980, Fractals and the accuracy of geographical measures: Math. Geol., v. 12, p. 85–98.Google Scholar
  10. Goodchild, M. F., 1982, The fractional Brownian process as a terrain simulation model: Proceedings, Thirteenth Annual Pittsburg Conference on Modelling and Simulation, v. 13, p. 1133–1137.Google Scholar
  11. Mandelbrot, B. B., 1967, How long is the coast of Britain? Statistical self-similarity and fractional dimension: Science, v. 156, p. 636–638.Google Scholar
  12. Mandelbrot, B. B., 1975, Stochastic models of the Earth's relief, the shape and the fractal dimension of the coastlines, and the number-area rule for islands: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, v. 72, p. 3825–3828.Google Scholar
  13. Mandelbrot, B. B., 1977, Fractals: form, chance and dimension: Freeman, San Francisco, 365 p.Google Scholar
  14. Mandelbrot, B. B., 1982a, Comment on computer rendering of fractal stochastic models: Comm. ACM, v. 25, p. 581–583.Google Scholar
  15. Mandelbrot, B. B., 1982b, The fractal geometry of nature: Freeman, San Francisco.Google Scholar
  16. Mark, D. M., 1975, Geomorphometric parameters: A review and evaluation: Geografiska Annaler, series A, v. 3, p. 165–177.Google Scholar
  17. Mark, D. M., 1978, Comments on Freiberger and Grenander's “Surface patterns in theoretical geography”: Comput. Geosci., v. 4, p. 371–372.Google Scholar
  18. Mark, D. M., 1979, Review of B. B. Mandelbrot's “Fractals: Form, Chance and Dimension”: Geo-Processing, v. 1, p. 202–204.Google Scholar
  19. Mark, D. M., 1980, On scales of investigation in geomorphology: Can. Geog., v. 24, p. 81–82.Google Scholar
  20. McEwan, R. B., 1980, USGS digital cartographic applications program: Jour. Surv. Mapp. Div., ASCE, November 1980, p. 13–22.Google Scholar
  21. Moultrie, W., 1970, Systems, computer simulation, and drainage basins: Bulletin of the Illinois Geographical Society, v. 12, p. 29–35.Google Scholar
  22. Peucker, T. K., Fowler, R. J., Little, J. J., and Mark, D. M., 1978, The triangulated irregular network, Proceedings, Digital Terrain Models (DTM) Symposium, American Society of Photogrammetry, May 9–11, 1978, St. Louis, Missouri, p. 516–540.Google Scholar
  23. Seginer, I., 1969, Random walk and roughness models of drainage networks: Water Resour. Res., v. 5, p. 591–607.Google Scholar
  24. Shelberg, M. C., Moellering, H., and Lam, N., 1982, Calculating the fractal dimensions of empirical cartographic curves: Proceedings, Fifth International Symposium on Computer-Assisted Cartography (Auto Carto V), p. 481–490.Google Scholar
  25. Shreve, R. L., 1979, Models for prediction in fluvial geomorphology. Math. Geol., v. 11, p. 165–174.Google Scholar
  26. Sprunt, B., 1972, Digital simulation of drainage basin development,in Chorley, R. J. (Ed.), Spatial analysis in geomorphology: Methuen & Co., London, p. 371–389.Google Scholar
  27. Tausworthe, R. C., 1965, Random numbers generated by linear recurrence modulo two, Math. Comput., v. 19, p. 201–209.Google Scholar
  28. Wood, W. F. and Snell, J. B., 1960, A quantitative system for classifying landforms: Quartermaster Research and Engineering Center, Technical Report EP-124, Natick, Massachusetts, 20pp.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • David M. Mark
    • 1
  • Peter B. Aronson
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of GeographyState University of New York at BuffaloBuffaloUSA
  2. 2.Environmental Systems Research InstituteRedlandsUSA

Personalised recommendations