4.7 Article

A 30-year (1984-2013) record of annual urban dynamics of Beijing City derived from Landsat data

期刊

REMOTE SENSING OF ENVIRONMENT
卷 166, 期 -, 页码 78-90

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.rse.2015.06.007

关键词

Urban land; Temporal consistency check; Time series; Change detection

资金

  1. Microsoft Research Asia Institute [20143000135]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Although mapping activities of urban land change have been widely carried out detailed information on urban development in time over rapid urbanization areas would have been lost in most studies with multi-year intervals. Here we provide a two-stage framework of long-term mapping of urban areas at an annual frequency in Beijing, China, over the period from 1984 to 2013. Classification for each year was carried out initially based on a number of Landsat scenes within that year using spectral information from a base image plus NDVI time series derived from all scenes. A temporal consistency check involving both temporal filtering and heuristic reasoning was then applied to the sequence of classified urban maps for further improvement. We assessed this time-series of urban maps based on two schemes. One is change detection in rapidly developing areas over the past three decades, and the other is accuracy assessment over the whole region in four selected years (i.e., 1984, 1990, 2000 and 2013). Based on validation using independent samples, the 0As (overall accuracies) of these four years are 96%, 93%, 92% and 95%, respectively. Meanwhile, the average accuracy of change detection for all years is 83%. In addition, the proposed temporal consistency check was found to be able to make considerable improvements (about 6%) to the overall accuracies and results of change detection. The resultant urban land sequence revealed that the average growth rates were 47.51 +/- 4.17 km(2)/year, 34.65 +/- 2.90 km(2)/year and 99.48 +/- 1.3 km(2)/year for 1984-1990, 1990-2000 and 2000-2013, respectively. (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据