Central European Journal of Geosciences

, Volume 5, Issue 4, pp 560–569 | Cite as

Utilization of a comparison of curvatures for land surface segmentation

Research Article


Utilization of a new geomorphometric variable for land surface segmentation — the angle of absolute curvatures — is a main goal of the paper. The angle of absolute curvatures is defined as the difference between the orientation of maximal curvature (field independent) and the orientation of the greater of the profile or the tangential curvature. Land-forms separated by three types of borders (A, B, C) can be delimited from the field of angles of absolute curvatures. Borders of A type are connected with a local extreme of slope. Borders of B and C type are connected with a change to the priority of either profile or tangential curvature, as shown in computation, respectively. Fields of altitude, slope, profile curvature, tangential curvature and rotor curvature are reflected by an algorithm. Distinct borders in the field of the angles of absolute curvatures are connected with a sudden change of value and with zero isolines in the previously mentioned fields. Spatially closed entities generated by this proposed algorithm are considered to be a variant of the elementary forms of the land surface. The quality of information generated by this algorithm depends on the size of the grid mesh of the input digital elevation model. The algorithm in its current state is suitable for locating the borders of some elementary forms in the first stage of geomorphology mapping.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    Burian L., Analysis of relationship between gravity field dependent curvatures and field independent curvatures of land surface. Master thesis, Comenius University, Bratislava, 2012 (In Slovak)Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Pike R J., Evans I S., Hengl T., Geomorphometry: A brief guide, In: Hengel T., Reuter H I., Geomorphometry: concepts, software, applications, Elsevier, 2008Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Pike R., A bibliography of Terrain Modelling (Geomorphometry) the Quantitative representation of Topography, Open file report, 2002, 02-465Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Evans I.S, Minár J., Classification of Geomorphometric variables, 2011, http://www.geomorphometry.org/system/files/EvansMinar2011geomorphometry.pdf Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Sharpy P.A., Land Surface in Gravity Points Classification by a Complete System of Curvatures, Mathematical Geology, 3,27, 1995, 373–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    Evans I.S., General geomorphometry, derivatives of altitude and descriptive statistics. In: Chorley R.J (Ed.), Spatial Analysis in Geomorphology. Harper and Row, New York, 1972, 17–90Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Minár J., Evans I.S, Elementary forms for land surface segmentation: The theoretical basis of terrain analysis and geomorphological mapping, Geomorphology, 95, 2008, 236–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    Minár J., Fuzzy approach in geomorphological mapping, Geomorphologia Slovaca, 1, 2006, 8–13Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Minár J., Machova Z., Review of approaches for segmentation of land surface, Geomorphologia Slovaca, 2, 2004, 74–80 (in Slovak)Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Waters R. S., Morphological mapping, Geography, 1958, 43, 10–17Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    Savigear R. A. G., A technique of morphological mapping, Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 1965, 55, 514–538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    Dalrymple J.B., et al., An hypothetical nine unit landsurface model, Zeitschrift f"ur Geomorphologie, 1968, 12, 60–76Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    Conacher A. J., dalrymple J. B. The nine-unit ladsurface model: An approach to pedogeomorphic research, Geoderma, 18, 1977, 1–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    Young A., Slopes, Oliver & Boyd, Edinburgh, 1972Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    Lastoczkin A. N., Morphodynamical analysis, Nedra, Leningrad, 1987 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    Lastoczkin A. N., Surface of land surface (Statistical methods and approaches in geomorphology), Nedra, Leningrad, 1991 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    Minár J., The principles of the elementary geomorphological regionalization, Acta Facultatis Rerum Naturalium Universitatis Comenianae, 1992, 33, 185–198Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    Minár J., et al., Geoecological research and mapping in large scales. In: Geograficke spektrum 3, Geografika, Bratislava, 2001 (in Slovak)Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    Speight J. G., A parametric approach to landform regions. In: Brown E.H., Waters R.S. (Eds.), Progress in Geomorphology: Papers in Honour of David L. Linton, Alden Press, London, 1974, 213–230Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    Brandli M., Hierarchical models for the definition and extraction of terrain features. In: Burrough, P.A., Frank A.U. (Eds.), Geographic Objects with Indeterminate Boundaries, Taylor & Francis, London, 1996, 257–270Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    Irvin B. J., et al., Fuzzy and isodata classification of landform elements for digital terrain data in Pleasant Valley, Wisconsin, Geoderma, 77, 1997, 137–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    Dragut E., Eisank C. Automated object-based classification of topography from SRTM data, Geomorphology, 141–142, 2012, 21–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. [23]
    Richter H., Eine neue Methode der grossmassstabigen Kartierung des Reliefs, Gotha, 106, 1962, 309–312Google Scholar
  24. [24]
    Troeh F. R., Landforms equations fitted to contour maps. American Journal of Science, 263, 1965, 616–627CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. [25]
    Krcho J., State of czechoslovak cartographic science and the problem of thematical maps, Acta geologica et geographica, 3, 1963, 204–215 (in Slovak)Google Scholar
  26. [26]
    Krcho J., Morphometric analysis of relief on the basis of geometric aspect of field theory. Acta geographica Universitatis Comenianae, 1, 1973, 1–233Google Scholar
  27. [27]
    Krcho J., Morphometrical analysis and digital elevation models, VEDA, Bratislava, 1990 (in Slovak)Google Scholar
  28. [28]
    Gauss C.F., Disquisitiones generales circa superficies curvas, Comentationes Societatis Regiae Scientiarum Gottingensis Recentiores, 9,99, 1928, 146Google Scholar
  29. [29]
    Efremov Y.K., An experience on morphological classification of elements and simple forms of topography. Voprosy Geografii, 11,109, 1949, 136 (in Russian).Google Scholar
  30. [30]
    Sharpy P. A., Topographic method of second derivatives. In: Stepanov, I.N. (Ed.), The Geometry of Earth Surface Structures, Poushchino Scientific Center, Poushchino, 1991, 28–58 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  31. [31]
    Parson A J., Hillslope Form, Routledge, London, 1988CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. [32]
    Goodchild M. F. Spatial Autocorelation, Geo Books, Norwich, 1986Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Versita Warsaw and Springer-Verlag Wien 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Natural sciencesComenius University in BratislavaBratislavaSlovakia

Personalised recommendations