4.7 Article

A method of DEM construction and related error analysis

Journal

COMPUTERS & GEOSCIENCES
Volume 36, Issue 6, Pages 717-725

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.cageo.2009.12.001

Keywords

DEM; Error; Surface modelling; Terrain representation

Funding

  1. China National Science Fund for Distinguished Young Scholars [40825003]
  2. State Key Laboratory of Resources and Environment Information System [081105]
  3. Ministry of Science and Technology of the People's Republic of China [2006BAC08B, 2006AA12Z219]
  4. Doctoral Candidate Innovation Research Support Program by Science & Technology Review [kjdb200902-3]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The concept and the computation of terrain representation error (ETR) are investigated and total DEM error is presented as an accuracy index for DEM evaluation at a global level. A promising method of surface modelling based on the theorem of surfaces (SMTS) has been developed. A numerical test and a real-world example are employed to comparatively analyze the simulation accuracy of SMTS and the classical interpolation methods, including IDW, SPLINE and KRIGING performed in ARCGIS 9.1 in terms of sampling and interpolation errors and of total DEM error. The numerical test shows that SMTS is much more accurate than the classical interpolation methods and ETR has a worse influence on the accuracy of SMTS than those of the classical interpolation methods. In a real-world example, DEMs are constructed with SMTS as well as the three classical interpolation methods. The results indicate that, although SMTS is more accurate than the classical interpolation methods, a real-world test indicates that there is a large accuracy loss. Total DEM error composed of, not only sampling and interpolation errors, but also ETRs can be considered as a good accuracy measure for DEM evaluation at a global level. SMTS is an alternative method for DEM construction. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available