Advertisement

A Predictive Uncertainty Model for Field-Based Survey Maps Using Generalized Linear Models

  • Stefan Leyk
  • Niklaus E. Zimmermann
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3234)

Abstract

In this paper we present an approach for predictive uncertainty modeling in field-based survey maps using Generalized Linear Models (GLM). Frequently, inherent uncertainty, especially in historical maps, makes the interpretation of objects very difficult. Such maps are of great value, but usually only few reference data are available. Consequently, the process of map interpretation could be greatly improved by the knowledge of uncertainty and its variation in space. To predict inherent uncertainty in forest cover information of the Swiss topographic map series from the 19th century we formulate rules from several predictors. These are topography-dependent variables and distance measures from old road networks. It is hypothesized that these rules best describe the errors of historical field work and hence the mapping quality. The uncertainty measure, the dependent variable, was derived from local map comparisons within moving windows of different sizes using a local community map as a reference map. The derivation of local Kappacoefficient and percent correctlyclassified from these enlarged sample plots takes the local distortion of the map into account. This allows an objective and spatially oriented comparison. Models fitted with uncertainty measures from 100m windows best described the relationship to the explanatory variables. A significant prediction potential for local uncertainty could thus be observed. The explained deviance by the Kappa-based model reached more than 40 percent. The correlation between predictions by the model and independent observations was ρ=0.76. Consequently, an improvement of the model to 47 percent, indicated by the G-value, was calculated. The model allows the spatial-oriented prediction of inherent uncertainty within different regions of comparable conditions. The integration of more study areas will result in more general rules for objective evaluation of the entire topographic map. The method can be applied for the evaluation of any field-based map which is used for subsequent applications such as land cover change assessments.

Keywords

Inherent Uncertainty Uncertainty Distribution Forest Boundary Swiss Plateau Large Forest Patch 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Agterberg, F.P.: Trend surface analysis. In: Gaile, G.L., Willmott, C.J. (eds.) Spatial Statistics and Model, Reide, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, pp. 147–171 (1984)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Austin, M.P.: Spatial prediction of species distribution: An interface between ecological theory and statistical modeling. Ecological Modelling 157, 189–207 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brown, D.G.: Classification and boundary vagueness in mapping pre-settlement forest types. International Journal of Geographical Information Science 12(2), 105–129 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brunsdon, C., Fotheringham, S., Charlton, M.: Geographically weighted local statistics applied to binary data. In: Egenhofer, M.J., Mark, D.M. (eds.) GIScience 2002. LNCS, vol. 2478, pp. 38–51. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cissel, J.H., Swanson, F.J., Weisberg, P.J.: Landscape management using historical fire regimes: Blue River, Oregon. Ecological Applications 9, 1217–1231 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Congalton, R.G.: A review of assessing the accuracy of classifications of remotely sensed data. Remote Sensing of Environment 37, 35–46 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dobson, A.J.: An Introduction to Generalized Linear Models, 2nd edn. Chapman and Hall/CRC, New York (2002)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fielding, A.H.: How should accuracy be measured? In: Fielding, A. (ed.) Mashine Learning Methods for Ecological Applications, pp. 209–223. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (1999)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fielding, A.H., Bell, J.F.: A review of methods for the assessment of prediction errors in conservation presence/absence models. Environmental Conservation 24(1), 38–49 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fisher, P.: Models of uncertainty in spatial data. In: Longley, P., Goodchild, M.F., Maguire, D., Rhind, D. (eds.) Geographical Information Systems: Principles, Techniques, Management and Applications, vol. (1), pp. 191–205. Wiley & Sons, New York (1999)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Foody, G.M.: Status of land cover classification accuracy assessment. Remote Sensing of Environment 80, 185–201 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Foody, G.M., Atkinson, P.M. (eds.): Uncertainty in Remote Sensing and GIS. Wiley, Chichester (2002)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Forbes, A.D.: Classification algorithm evaluation: five performance measures based on confusion matrices. Journal of Clinical Monitoring 11, 189–206 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Guisan, A., Edwards, T.C., Hastie, T.: Generalized linear and generalized additive models in studies of species distribution: setting the scene. Ecological Modelling 157, 89–100 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Guisan, A., Zimmermann, N.E.: Predictive habitat distribution models in ecology. Ecological Modelling 135, 147–186 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hagen, A.: Fuzzy set approach to assessing similarity of categorical maps. International Journal of Geographical Information Science 17(3), 235–249 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Jäger, G., Benz, U.: Measures of classification accuracy based on fuzzy similarity. IEEE Transactions on GeoScience and Remote Sensing 38, 1462–1467 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Klir, G.J., Wierman, M.J.: Uncertainty-Based Information. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Leyk, S., Boesch, R., Weibel, R.: A conceptual framework for uncertainty investigation in map-based land cover change modelling. Transactions in GIS (2004) (forthcomingGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lewis, H.G., Brown, M.: A generalised confusion matrix for assessing area estimates from remotely sensed data. International Journal of Remote Sensing 22, 3223–3235 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Manies, K.L., Mladenoff, D.J., Nordheim, E.V.: Assessing large-scale surveyor variability in the historic forest data of the original U.S. Public Land Surveys. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 31, 1719–1730 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    McCullagh, P., Nelder, J.A.: Generalized Linear Models, 2nd edn. Chapman and Hall, London (1989)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Moisen, G.G., Edwards, T.C.: Use of generalized linear models and digital data in a forest inventory of northern Utah. Journal of Agricultural, Biological and Environmental Statistics 4, 372–390 (1999)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Plewe, B.: The nature of uncertainty in historical geographic information. Transactions in GIS 6(4), 431–456 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Steele, B.M., Winne, J.C., Redmond, R.L.: Estimation and mapping of misclassification probabilities for thematic land cover maps. Remote Sensing of Environment 66, 192–202 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Stehman, S.V., Czaplewski, R.L.: Design and analysis for thematic map accuracy assessment: fundamental principles. Remote Sensing of Environment 64, 331–344 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Van Houwelingen, J.C., Le Cessie, S.: Predictive value of statistical models. Statistics in Medicine 9, 1303–1325 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Varzi, A.C.: Vagueness in geography. Philosophy and Geography 4(1), 49–65 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Weisberg, S.: Applied Linear Regression. Wiley, New York (1980)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Woodcock, C.E., Gopal, S.: Fuzzy set theory and thematic maps: accuracy assessment and area estimation. International Journal of Geographical Information Science 14(2), 153–172 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Zhang, J., Goodchild, M.F.: Uncertainty in Geographical Information. Taylor & Francis, London (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stefan Leyk
    • 1
  • Niklaus E. Zimmermann
    • 1
  1. 1.Swiss Federal Research Institute WSLBirmensdorfSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations