Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Forest landscape visual quality evaluation using artificial intelligence techniques as a decision support system

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Forest management should be directed towards multifunctional management and utilization of forest services (other than wood production) in order to achieve maximum utilization and minimum degradation. Artificial intelligence enables forest managers to plan for utilization of forest landscape aesthetic values. Visual quality evaluation is a stochastic problem in natural forest landscapes and it is influenced by forest characteristics. We aimed to landscape visual quality evaluation by expert/human-perception-based approach and application of artificial intelligence modeling techniques for the visual quality prediction of forest landscapes. Therefore, we recorded five landscape attributes in 100 forest landscapes. We developed the stochastic model to evaluate visual quality potential by artificial intelligence techniques. Comparing to multi-layer regression (R2 = 0.588) and multi-layer perceptron (R2 = 0.847), the radial basis function (RBF) (R2 = 0.887) model represents the highest value of R2 in the test data set. The water, shrubs, roads, rocky hills, and trees, in forest landscapes were introduced respectively as the most important attributes which influence the RBF model. The designed graphical user interface tool, as an environmental decision support system, evaluates landscape visual quality of forests, and it helps to solve stochastic problems such as visual quality value.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aghajani H, Marvi Mohadjer MR, Jahani A, Asef MR, Shirvany A, Azaryan M (2014) Investigation of affective habitat factors affecting an abundance of wood macrofungi and sensitivity analysis using the artificial neural network (case study: Kheyrud forest, Noshahr). Iran J For Poplar Res 21(4):617–628

    Google Scholar 

  • Aghelpour P, Varshavian V (2020) Evaluation of stochastic and artificial intelligence models in modeling and predicting of river daily flow time series. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 34:33–50

    Google Scholar 

  • Arriaza M, Cañas-Ortega J, Cañas-Madueño J, Ruiz-Aviles P (2004) Assessing the visual quality of rural landscapes. Landsc Urban Plan 69:115–125

    Google Scholar 

  • Azimi Y (2019) Prediction of seismic wave intensity generated by bench blasting using intelligence committee machines. Int J Eng Trans A Basics 32(04):617–627

    Google Scholar 

  • Azimi Y, Khoshrou SH, Osanloo M (2019) Prediction of blast induced ground vibration (BIGV) of quarry mining using hybrid genetic algorithm optimized artificial neural network. Measurement 147:106874

    Google Scholar 

  • Aziz K, Rahman A, Fang G (2014) Application of artificial neural networks in regional flood frequency analysis: a case study for Australia. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 28:541–554

    Google Scholar 

  • Bjerke T, Xstdahl T, Thrane C, Strumse E (2006) Vegetation density of urban parks and perceived appropriateness for recreation. Urban For Urban Green 5(1):35–44

    Google Scholar 

  • Carvalho-Ribeiro S, Loupa Ramos I, Madeira L, Barroso F, Menezes H, Pinto Correia T (2013) Is land cover an important asset for addressing the subjective landscape dimensions? Land Use Policy 35:50–60

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen B, Adimo OA, Bao Z (2009) Assessment of aesthetic quality and multiple functions of urban green space from the users’ perspective: the case of Hangzhou Flower Garden, China. Landsc Urban Plan 93:76

    Google Scholar 

  • Daniel TC (2001) Whither scenic beauty? Visual landscape quality assessment in the 21st century. Landsc Urban Plan 54:267

    Google Scholar 

  • de la Fuente G, de Atauri JA, Lucio JVY (2006) Relationship between landscape visual attributes and spatial pattern indices: a test study in Mediterranean-climate landscapes. Landsc Urban Plan 77:393

    Google Scholar 

  • Dupont L, Ooms K, Antrop M, Van Eetvelde V (2016) Comparing saliency maps and eye-tracking focus maps: the potential use in visual impact assessment based on landscape photographs. Landsc Urban Plan 148:17–26

    Google Scholar 

  • Dwyer J, Schroeder H, Gobster P (2006) The significance of urban trees and forests: toward a deeper understanding of values. J Arboric 17(10):276–284

    Google Scholar 

  • Ebenberger M, Arnberger A (2019) Exploring visual preferences for structural attributes of urban forest stands for restoration and heat relief. Urban For Urban Green. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2019.04.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eyvindson K, Hakanen J, Monkkonen M, Juutinen A, Karvanen J (2019) Value of information in multiple criteria decision making: an application to forest conservation. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 33:2007–2018

    Google Scholar 

  • Franco D, Franco D, Mannino I, Zanett G (2003) The impact of agroforestry networks on scenic beauty estimation: the role of a landscape ecological network on a socio-cultural process. Landsc Urban Plan 62:119–138

    Google Scholar 

  • Güngör S, Polat AT (2018) Relationship between visual quality and landscape characteristics in urban park. J Environ Prot Ecol 19(2):939–948

    Google Scholar 

  • Howley P (2011) Landscape aesthetics: assessing the general publics’ preferences towards rural landscapes. Ecol Econ 72:161–169

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoyle H, Hitchmough J, Jorgensen A (2017) All about the ‘wow factor’? The relationships between aesthetics, restorative effect and perceived biodiversity in designed urban planting. Landsc Urban Plan 164:109–123

    Google Scholar 

  • Jafari MJ, Kalantary S, Zendehdel R, Sarbakhsh P (2014) Feasibility of substituting ethylene with sulfur hexafluoride as a tracer gas in hood performance test by ASHRAE-110-95 method. Int J Occup Hyg 6(1):31–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Jahani A (2016) Modeling of forest canopy density confusion in environmental assessment using artificial neural network. For Poplar Res 24(2):310–322

    Google Scholar 

  • Jahani A (2019a) Sycamore failure hazard classification model (SFHCM): an environmental decision support system (EDSS) in urban green spaces. Int J Environ Sci Technol 16:955–964

    Google Scholar 

  • Jahani A (2019b) Forest landscape aesthetic quality model (FLAQM): a comparative study on landscape modelling using regression analysis and artificial neural networks. J For Sci 65(2):61–69

    Google Scholar 

  • Jahani A, Mohammadi Fazel A (2017) Aesthetic quality modeling of landscape in urban green space using artificial neural network. J For Wood Prod (Iran J Nat Res) 69(4):951–963

    Google Scholar 

  • Jahani A, Makhdoum M, Feghhi J, Etemad V (2011) Determining of landscape quality and look out points for ecotourism land use (case study: Patom District of Kheyrud Forest). J Environ Res 2(3):13–20

    Google Scholar 

  • Jahani A, Feghhi J, Makhdoum MF, Omid M (2016) Optimized forest degradation model (OFDM): an environmental decision support system for environmental impact assessment using an artificial neural network. J Environ Plan Manag 59(2):222–244

    Google Scholar 

  • Jahani A, Goshtasb H, Saffariha M (2020) Tourism impact assessment modeling in vegetation density of protected areas using data mining techniques. Land Degrad Dev. https://doi.org/10.1002/ldr.3549

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kalantary S, Jahani A, Pourbabaki R, Beigzadeh Z (2019) Application of ANN modeling techniques in the prediction of the diameter of PCL/gelatin nanofibers in environmental and medical studies. RSC Adv 9(43):24858–24874

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kalantary S, Jahani A, Jahani R (2020) MLR and ANN approaches for prediction of synthetic/natural nanoibers diameter in the environmental and medical applications. Sci Rep. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-65121-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kao Y, Huang K, Maybank S (2016) Hierarchical aesthetic quality assessment using deep convolutional neural networks. Signal Process Image Commun 47:500–510

    Google Scholar 

  • Kasiviswanathan KS, Sudheer KP (2017) Methods used for quantifying the prediction uncertainty of artificial neural network based hydrologic models. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 31:1659–1670

    Google Scholar 

  • Kerebel A, Gelinas N, Dery S, Voigt B, Munson A (2019) Landscape aesthetic modelling using Bayesian networks: conceptual framework and participatory indicator weighting. Landsc Urban Plan 185:258–271

    Google Scholar 

  • Misgav A (2000) Visual preference of the public for vegetation groups in Israel. Landsc Urban Plan 48:143–159

    Google Scholar 

  • Mosaffaei Z, Jahani A, Zare Chahouki MA, Goshtasb H, Etemad V, Saffariha M (2020) Soil texture and plant degradation predictive model (STPDPM) in national parks using artificial neural network (ANN). Model Earth Syst Environ 6:715–729

    Google Scholar 

  • Omidi L, Zare S, Rad RM, Meshkani M, Kalantary S (2017) Effects of shift work on health and satisfaction of workers in the mining industry. Int J Occup Hyg 9(1):21–25

    Google Scholar 

  • Özguner H, Kendle AD (2006) Public attitudes towards naturalistic versus designed landscapes in the City of Sheffield (UK). Landsc Urban Plan 74:139

    Google Scholar 

  • Palmer JF, Hoffman RE (2001) Rating reliability and representation validity in scenic landscape assessment. Landsc Urban Plan 54:149

    Google Scholar 

  • Polat AT (2012) The determination of relationships between visual quality and the degree of naturalness in urban parks. Iğdir Univ J Inst Sci Technol 2(3):85

    Google Scholar 

  • Pourmohammad P, Jahani A, Zare Chahooki MA, Goshtasb Meigooni H (2020) Road impact assessment modelling on plants diversity in national parks using regression analysis in comparison with artificial intelligence. Model Earth Syst Environ 6(3):1281–1292

    Google Scholar 

  • Renshaw E, Comas C, Mateu J (2009) Analysis of forest thinning strategies through the development of space-time growth-interaction simulation models. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 23:275–288

    Google Scholar 

  • Saeidi S, Mohammadzadeh M, Salmanmahiny A, Mirkarimi SH (2017) Performance evaluation of multiple methods for landscape aesthetic suitability mapping: a comparative study between multi-criteria evaluation, logistic regression and multi-layer perceptron neural network. Land Use Policy 67:1–12

    Google Scholar 

  • Saffariha M, Azarnivand H, Tavili A (2014a) Effects of grazed exclosure on some of nutrient elements of aerial and underground organs of Artemisia sieberi, Stipa hohenacheriana and Salsola rigida. Int J Agron Agric Res 4(2):62–70

    Google Scholar 

  • Saffariha M, Azarnivand H, Tavili A, Mohammadzadeh Khani H (2014b) Investigation effects of rangeland exclosure on some soil properties in Artemisia sieberi, Stipa hohenacheriana and Salsola rigida habitats (case study: Roodshoor, Saveh, Iran). J Biodiv Environ Sci 4:195–204

    Google Scholar 

  • Saffariha M, Azarnivand H, Zare Chahooki MA, Tavili A, Nejad Ebrahimi S, Potter D (2019) The effect of flowering on the quantity and quality of Salvia limbata in altitudes. J Range Watershed Manag 72:139–149

    Google Scholar 

  • Sahraoui Y, Clauzel C, Foltete JC (2016) Spatial modelling of landscape aesthetic potential in urban-rural fringes. J Environ Manae 181:623

    Google Scholar 

  • Scarfo F, Mercurio R, del Peso Cc (2013) Assessing visual impacts of forest operations on a landscape in the Serre Regional Park of southern Italy. Landsc Ecol Eng 9:1–10

    Google Scholar 

  • Sevenant M, Antrop M (2009) cognitive attributes and aesthetic preferences in assessment and differentiation of landscapes. J Environ Manag 90:2889

    Google Scholar 

  • Shams SR, Jahani A, Moeinaddini M, Khorasani N (2020) Air carbon monoxide forecasting using an artificial neural network in comparison with multiple regression. Model Earth Syst Environ 6(3):1467–1475

    Google Scholar 

  • Shelby B, Thompson J, Brunson M, Johnson J (2003) Changes in scenic quality after harvest: a decade of ratings for six silviculture treatments. J For 101(2):30–35

    Google Scholar 

  • Shirani Sarmazeh N, Jahani A, Goshtasb H, Etemad V (2018a) Ecological impacts assessment of recreation on quality of soil and vegetation in protected areas (case study: Qhamishloo National park and Wildlife Refuge). J Nat Environ 70(4):881–891

    Google Scholar 

  • Shirani Sarmazeh N, Jahani A, Goshtasb H, Etemad V (2018b) Environmental impact assessment of ecotourism in protected areas. J Environ Dev 9(17):25–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Simensen T, Halvorsen R, Erikstad L (2018) Methods for landscape characterisation and mapping: a systematic review. Land Use Policy 75:557–569

    Google Scholar 

  • Tajmiri Sh, Azimi E, Hosseini MR, Azimi Y (2020) Evolving multilayer perceptron, and factorial design for modelling and optimization of dye decomposition by bio-synthetized nano CdS-diatomite composite. Environ Res 182:108997

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wang R, Zhao J, Meitner MJ (2017) Urban woodland understory characteristics in relation to aesthetic and recreational preference. Urban For Urban Green 24:55–61

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wang L, Ngan HYT, Yung NHC (2018) Automatic incident classification for large-scale traffic data by adaptive boosting SVM. Inf Sci 467:59–73

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang R, Zhao J, Meitner MJ, Hu Y, Xu X (2019) Characteristics of urban green spaces in relation to aesthetic preference and stress recovery. Urban For Urban Green. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2019.03.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White M, Smith A, Humphryes K, Pahl S, Snelling D, Depledge M (2010) Blue space: the importance of water for preference, affect, and restorativeness ratings of natural and built scenes. J Environ Psychol 30:482–493

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Natural Environment and Biodiversity Department, College of Environment, Karaj, Iran

    Ali Jahani & Behzad Rayegani

Authors
  1. Ali Jahani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Behzad Rayegani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ali Jahani.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jahani, A., Rayegani, B. Forest landscape visual quality evaluation using artificial intelligence techniques as a decision support system. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 34, 1473–1486 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-020-01832-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-020-01832-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation