Abstract
An essential aspect of the increasing sophistication of ecological models is the use of spatially explicit inputs and outputs. Thus, the challenge of documenting the uncertainty of model parameters must expand to include the distribution of error across the surface of maps, satellite images, and other ecological data that are keyed by geographic location. It has become more common to report the overall accuracy of map data sets. Support for such accuracy statements is seen in the descriptive attributes that are defined in file format conventions (e.g., the spatial data transfer standard, SDTS; FGDC 1998). These attributes include documentation of the root mean square error for positional accuracy and error rates associated with the delineation of specific map features. The probability of mapping errors, however, is generally not consistent across the surface of a map data set (Congalton 1988a; Steele et al. 1998), and standard methods have not been adopted for presenting the spatial distribution of error in thematic maps. The confusion matrix is the most commonly accepted method for assessing the accuracy of thematic maps, but it is entirely devoid of spatial context. This chapter addresses shortfalls in various approaches to predicting the distribution of error in thematic maps derived from image data.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Bartlett, D., M. Hardisky, R. Johnson, M. Gross, V. Klemas, and J. Hartman. 1988. Continental scale variability in vegetation reflectance and its relationship to canopy morphology. International Journal of Remote Sensing 43:595–598.
Belward, A., and T. Loveland. 1995. The IGBP-DIS 1-km land cover project: remote sensing in action. Pages 1099–1106 in Proceedings of the twenty first annual conference of the remote sensing society. The Remote Sensing Society, The University of Nottingham, UK.
Bierkins, M., and P. Burrough. 1993a. The indicator approach to categorical soil data. I. Theory. Journal of Soil Science 44:361–368.
Bierkins, M., and P. Burrough. 1993b. The indicator approach to categorical soil data. II. Application to mapping and land use suitability analysis. Journal of Soil Science 44:369–381.
Campbell, J. 1981. Spatial correlation effects upon accuracy of supervised classification of land cover. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 47:355–364.
Cliff, A., and J. Ord. 1973. Spatial autocorrelation. Pion Limited, London, UK
Congalton, R. 1988a. Using spatial autocorrelation analysis to explore the errors in maps generated from remotely sensed data. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 54:587–592.
Congalton, R. 1988b. A comparison of sampling schemes used in generating error matrices for assessing the accuracy of maps generated from remotely sensed data. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 54:593–600.
Fenstermaker, L. 1994. Remote sensing thematic accuracy assessment: a compendium. American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, Bethesda, MD.
FGDC (Federal Geographic Data Committee). 1998. Spatial data transfer standard. FGDC-STD-002-1998. Computer Products Office, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA.
Fisher, P. 1996. Visualization of the reliability in classified remotely sensed images. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 60:905–910.
Fisher, P., and M. Langford. 1996. Modeling sensitivity to accuracy in classified imagery: a study of areal interpolation by dasymetric mapping. Professional Geographer 48:299–309.
Fisher, P. 1998. Improving error models for digital elevation models. Pages 55–61 in R. Jeansoulin and M.F. Goodchild, eds. Data quality in geographic information: from error to uncertainty. Hermes, Paris.
Foody, G. 1999. The continuum of classification fuzziness in thematic mapping. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 65:443–451.
Gomez-Hernandez J.J., and R.M. Srivastava. 1990a. ISIM3D: an ANSI C three-dimensional multiple indicator conditional simulation program. Computers and Geosciences 16:395–440.
Gomez-Hernandez J.J., and R.M. Srivastava. 1990b. ISIM3D (version 2.5), an ANSI C program downloaded from ftp://mundo.dihma.upv.es/pub/gcosim3d/.
Labovitz, M. 1984. The influence of autocorrelation in signature extraction—an example from a geobotanical investigation of Cotter Basin, Montana. International Journal of Remote Sensing 50:315–332.
Loveland, T.R., Z. Zhu, D.O. Ohlen, J.F. Brown, B.C. Reed, and L. Yang. 1999. An analysis of the global land cover characterization process. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 65(9): 1021–1032.
McGwire, K. 1992. Analyst variability in the labeling of unsupervised classifications. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 58:1673–1677.
McGwire, K., J. Estes, and J. Star. 1996. A comparison of maximum likelihood-based supervised classification strategies. GeoCarto 11:3–13
O’Neill, R., J. Krummel, R. Gardner, G. Sugihara, B. Jackson, D. DeAngelis, et al. 1995. Indices of landscape pattern. Landscape Ecology 1:153–162.
Riitters, K., R. O’Neill, C. Hunsaker, J. Wickham, D. Yankee, S. Timmins, et al. 1995. A factor analysis of landscape pattern and structure metrics. Landscape Ecology 10:23–39
Scott J., F. Davis, B. Csuti, R. Noss, B. Butterfield, C. Groves, 1993. Gap analysis — a geographical approach to protection of biological diversity. Wildlife Monographs 123:1–41.
Steele, B., C. Winne, and R. Remond. 1998. Estimation and mapping of misclassification probabilities for thematic land cover maps. Remote Sensing of Environment 66:192.
Veregin, H. 1989. A taxonomy of error in spatial databases. Technical paper 89-12. National Center for Geographic Information and Analysis, Santa Barbara, CA.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2001 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
McGwire, K.C., Fisher, P. (2001). Spatially Variable Thematic Accuracy: Beyond the Confusion Matrix. In: Hunsaker, C.T., Goodchild, M.F., Friedl, M.A., Case, T.J. (eds) Spatial Uncertainty in Ecology. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-0209-4_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-0209-4_14
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-0-387-98889-4
Online ISBN: 978-1-4613-0209-4
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive