Digital elevation model quality on digital soil mapping prediction accuracy
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2018 |
Outros Autores: | , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Ciência e Agrotecnologia (Online) |
Texto Completo: | http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1413-70542018000600608 |
Resumo: | ABSTRACT Digital elevation models (DEM) used in digital soil mapping (DSM) are commonly selected based on measures and indicators (quality criteria) that are thought to reflect how well a given DEM represents the terrain surface. The hypothesis is that the more accurate a DEM, the more accurate will be the DSM predictions. The objective of this study was to assess different criteria to identify the DEM that delivers the most accurate DSM predictions. A set of 10 criteria were used to evaluate the quality of nine DEMs constructed with different data sources, processing routines and three resolutions (5, 20, and 30 m). Multinomial logistic regression models were calibrated using 157 soil observations and terrain attributes derived from each DEM. Soil class predictions were validated using leave-one-out cross-validation. Results showed that, for each resolution, the quality criteria are useful to identify the DEM that more accurately represents the terrain surface. However, for all three resolutions, the most accurate DEM did not produce the most accurate DSM predictions. With the 20-m resolution DEMs, DSM predictions were five percentage points less accurate when using the more accurate DEM. The 5-m resolution was the most accurate DEM overall and resulted in DSM predictions with 44% accuracy; this value was equal to that obtained with two coarser resolution, lower accuracy DEMs. Thus, identifying the truly best DEM for DSM requires assessment of the accuracy of DSM predictions using some form of external validation, because not necessarily the most accurate DEM will produce the best DSM predictions. |
id |
UFLA-2_10ac364127047d9a5750de0e7b67a1bf |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:scielo:S1413-70542018000600608 |
network_acronym_str |
UFLA-2 |
network_name_str |
Ciência e Agrotecnologia (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Digital elevation model quality on digital soil mapping prediction accuracyMultinomial logistic regressionpredictor variablescollinearityShannon entropyABSTRACT Digital elevation models (DEM) used in digital soil mapping (DSM) are commonly selected based on measures and indicators (quality criteria) that are thought to reflect how well a given DEM represents the terrain surface. The hypothesis is that the more accurate a DEM, the more accurate will be the DSM predictions. The objective of this study was to assess different criteria to identify the DEM that delivers the most accurate DSM predictions. A set of 10 criteria were used to evaluate the quality of nine DEMs constructed with different data sources, processing routines and three resolutions (5, 20, and 30 m). Multinomial logistic regression models were calibrated using 157 soil observations and terrain attributes derived from each DEM. Soil class predictions were validated using leave-one-out cross-validation. Results showed that, for each resolution, the quality criteria are useful to identify the DEM that more accurately represents the terrain surface. However, for all three resolutions, the most accurate DEM did not produce the most accurate DSM predictions. With the 20-m resolution DEMs, DSM predictions were five percentage points less accurate when using the more accurate DEM. The 5-m resolution was the most accurate DEM overall and resulted in DSM predictions with 44% accuracy; this value was equal to that obtained with two coarser resolution, lower accuracy DEMs. Thus, identifying the truly best DEM for DSM requires assessment of the accuracy of DSM predictions using some form of external validation, because not necessarily the most accurate DEM will produce the best DSM predictions.Editora da UFLA2018-12-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1413-70542018000600608Ciência e Agrotecnologia v.42 n.6 2018reponame:Ciência e Agrotecnologia (Online)instname:Universidade Federal de Lavras (UFLA)instacron:UFLA10.1590/1413-70542018426027418info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessCosta,Elias MendesSamuel-Rosa,AlessandroAnjos,Lúcia Helena Cunha doseng2019-01-28T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S1413-70542018000600608Revistahttp://www.scielo.br/cagroPUBhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||renpaiva@dbi.ufla.br|| editora@editora.ufla.br1981-18291413-7054opendoar:2022-11-22T16:31:36.685061Ciência e Agrotecnologia (Online) - Universidade Federal de Lavras (UFLA)true |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Digital elevation model quality on digital soil mapping prediction accuracy |
title |
Digital elevation model quality on digital soil mapping prediction accuracy |
spellingShingle |
Digital elevation model quality on digital soil mapping prediction accuracy Costa,Elias Mendes Multinomial logistic regression predictor variables collinearity Shannon entropy |
title_short |
Digital elevation model quality on digital soil mapping prediction accuracy |
title_full |
Digital elevation model quality on digital soil mapping prediction accuracy |
title_fullStr |
Digital elevation model quality on digital soil mapping prediction accuracy |
title_full_unstemmed |
Digital elevation model quality on digital soil mapping prediction accuracy |
title_sort |
Digital elevation model quality on digital soil mapping prediction accuracy |
author |
Costa,Elias Mendes |
author_facet |
Costa,Elias Mendes Samuel-Rosa,Alessandro Anjos,Lúcia Helena Cunha dos |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Samuel-Rosa,Alessandro Anjos,Lúcia Helena Cunha dos |
author2_role |
author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Costa,Elias Mendes Samuel-Rosa,Alessandro Anjos,Lúcia Helena Cunha dos |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Multinomial logistic regression predictor variables collinearity Shannon entropy |
topic |
Multinomial logistic regression predictor variables collinearity Shannon entropy |
description |
ABSTRACT Digital elevation models (DEM) used in digital soil mapping (DSM) are commonly selected based on measures and indicators (quality criteria) that are thought to reflect how well a given DEM represents the terrain surface. The hypothesis is that the more accurate a DEM, the more accurate will be the DSM predictions. The objective of this study was to assess different criteria to identify the DEM that delivers the most accurate DSM predictions. A set of 10 criteria were used to evaluate the quality of nine DEMs constructed with different data sources, processing routines and three resolutions (5, 20, and 30 m). Multinomial logistic regression models were calibrated using 157 soil observations and terrain attributes derived from each DEM. Soil class predictions were validated using leave-one-out cross-validation. Results showed that, for each resolution, the quality criteria are useful to identify the DEM that more accurately represents the terrain surface. However, for all three resolutions, the most accurate DEM did not produce the most accurate DSM predictions. With the 20-m resolution DEMs, DSM predictions were five percentage points less accurate when using the more accurate DEM. The 5-m resolution was the most accurate DEM overall and resulted in DSM predictions with 44% accuracy; this value was equal to that obtained with two coarser resolution, lower accuracy DEMs. Thus, identifying the truly best DEM for DSM requires assessment of the accuracy of DSM predictions using some form of external validation, because not necessarily the most accurate DEM will produce the best DSM predictions. |
publishDate |
2018 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2018-12-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1413-70542018000600608 |
url |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1413-70542018000600608 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
10.1590/1413-70542018426027418 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
text/html |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Editora da UFLA |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Editora da UFLA |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Ciência e Agrotecnologia v.42 n.6 2018 reponame:Ciência e Agrotecnologia (Online) instname:Universidade Federal de Lavras (UFLA) instacron:UFLA |
instname_str |
Universidade Federal de Lavras (UFLA) |
instacron_str |
UFLA |
institution |
UFLA |
reponame_str |
Ciência e Agrotecnologia (Online) |
collection |
Ciência e Agrotecnologia (Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Ciência e Agrotecnologia (Online) - Universidade Federal de Lavras (UFLA) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
||renpaiva@dbi.ufla.br|| editora@editora.ufla.br |
_version_ |
1799874970789085184 |