Skip to main content
Log in

Comparison of classification and clustering methods in spatial rainfall pattern recognition at Northern Iran

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Theoretical and Applied Climatology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Pattern recognition is the science of data structure and its classification. There are many classification and clustering methods prevalent in pattern recognition area. In this research, rainfall data in a region in Northern Iran are classified with natural breaks classification method and with a revised fuzzy c-means (FCM) algorithm as a clustering approach. To compare these two methods, the results of the FCM method are hardened. Comparison proved overall coincidence of natural breaks classification and FCM clustering methods. The differences arise from nature of these two methods. In the FCM, the boundaries between adjacent clusters are not sharp while they are abrupt in natural breaks method. The sensitivity of both methods with respect to rain gauge density was also analyzed. For each rain gauge density, percentage of boundary region and hardening error are at a minimum in the first cluster while the second cluster has the maximum error. Moreover, the number of clusters was sensitive to the number of stations. Since the optimum number of classes is not apparent in the classification methods and the boundary between adjacent classes is abrupt, use of clustering methods such as the FCM method, overcome such deficiencies. The methods were also applied for mapping an aridity index in the study region where the results revealed good coincidence between the FCM clustering and natural breaks classification methods.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

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

  • Bezdek JC (1981) Pattern recognition with fuzzy objective function algorithms. Plenum Press, New York, USA, p 256

    Google Scholar 

  • Bunkers MJ, Miller JR, DeGaetano AT (1996) Definition of climate regions in the Northern plains using an objective cluster modification technique. J Climate 9:130–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Claggett PR, Jantz CA, Goetz SJ, Bisland C (2004) Assessing development pressure in the Chesapeake Bay watershed—an evaluation of two landuse change models. Environ Monit and Assess 94:129–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dent BD (1996) Cartography and thematic map design. Wm. C. Brown Publishing, Dubuque, IA

    Google Scholar 

  • Eischeid JK, Baker CB, Karl TR, Diaz HF (1995) The quality control of long-term climatological data using objective data analysis. J Appl Meteor 34:2787–2795

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fukuyama Y, Sugeno M (1989) A new method of choosing the number of clusters for the fuzzy c-means method. Proceedings of Fifth Fuzzy Systems Symposium, Kobe, Japan, pp 247–250

    Google Scholar 

  • Hargrove WW, Hoffman FM (2005) Potential of multivariate quantitative methods for delineation and visualization of ecoregions. Environ Manage 34(1):S39–S60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenks GF (1967) The data model concept in statistical mapping. Int Yearb Cartogr 7:186–190

    Google Scholar 

  • Kulkarni A, Kripalani RH (1998) Rainfall patterns over India: classification with fuzzy c-means method. Theor Appl Climatol 59:137–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lauzon N, Anctil F, Baxter CW (2006) Clustering of heterogeneous precipitation fields for assessment and possible improvement of lumped neural network models for streamflow forecasts. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 10:485–494

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawson MP, Balling RC Jr, Peter AJ, Rundquist DC (1981) Spatial analysis of secular temperature fluctuations. J Climatol 1:325–332

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGhee JW (1985) Introductory statistic. West Publishing Co., New York, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • McMahon TA, Mein RG (1986) River and reservoir yield. Water Resources Publication, Littleton, Colorado, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Osaragi T (2002) Classification methods for spatial data representation. CASA (Center of Advanced Spatial Analysis University College London)

  • Ramachandra Rao A, Srinivas VV (2006) Regionalization of watersheds by hybrid-cluster analysis. J Hydrol 318:37–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramachandra Rao A, Srinivas VV (2008) Regionalization of watersheds: an approach based on cluster analysis. Water Sci Technol Libr 58, Springer, Dordrecht, Netherlands

  • Schalkoff R (1992) Pattern recognition: statistical, structural and neural approaches. Wiley, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Schulz TM, Samson PJ (1988) Nonprecipitating low cloud frequencies for central North America: 1982. J Appl Metro 27:427–440

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sugeno M, Yasukawa T (1993) A fuzzy-logic-based approach to qualitative modeling. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 1(1). February 1993

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Saeed Golian.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Golian, S., Saghafian, B., Sheshangosht, S. et al. Comparison of classification and clustering methods in spatial rainfall pattern recognition at Northern Iran. Theor Appl Climatol 102, 319–329 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-010-0267-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-010-0267-x

Keywords

Navigation