Abstract
Geosimulation is a form of microsimulation that seeks to understand geographical patterns and dynamics as the outcome of micro-level geographical processes. Geosimulation has been applied to understand such diverse systems as lake ecology, traffic congestion and urban growth. A crucial task common to these applications is to express the agreement between model and reality and hence the confidence one can have in model results. Such evaluation requires a geospatial perspective; it is not sufficient if micro-level interactions are realistic. Importantly, interactions should be such that meso- and macro- level patterns emerging from the model are realistic. In recent years, a host of map comparison methods have been developed, which address different aspects of the agreement between model and reality. This paper places such methods in a framework to systematically assess breadth and width of model performance. The framework expresses agreement at the continuum of spatial scales ranging from local to whole landscape and separately addresses agreement in structure and presence. A common reference level makes different performance metrics mutually comparable and guides the interpretation of results. The framework is applied for the evaluation of a constrained cellular automata model of the Netherlands. The case demonstrates that a performance assessment lacking either a multi-criteria and multi-scale perspective or a reference level would result in an unbalanced account and ultimately false conclusions.
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
Barredo, J.I., Demicheli, L.: Urban sustainability in developing countries’ megacities: modelling and predicting future urban growth in Lagos. Cities 20, 297–310 (2003)
Batty, M., Longley, P.: Fractal cities: a geometry of form and function. Academic Press Professional, Inc., San Diego (1994)
Batty, M., Torrens, P.M.: Modelling and prediction in a complex world. Futures 37, 745–766 (2005)
Benenson, I., Torrens, P.M.: Geosimulation: object-based modeling of urban phenomena. Comput Environ. Urban Syst. 28, 1–8 (2004)
Benenson, I., Omer, I., Hatna, E.: Entity-based modeling of urban residential dynamics: the case of Yaffo, Tel Aviv. Environ. Plan B: Plan Des. 29, 491–512 (2002)
Benguigui, L., Blumenfeld-Lieberthal, E., Czamanksi, D.: The dynamics of the Tel Aviv morphology. Environ. Plan B: Plan Des. 33, 269–284 (2006)
Briggs, W.M., Levine, R.A.: Wavelets and field forecast verification. Mon. Weather Rev. 125, 1329–1341 (1997)
Cohen, J.: Coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 20, 37–46 (1960)
Costanza, R.: Model goodness of fit: a multiple resolution procedure. Ecol. Model 47, 199–215 (1989)
de Keersmaecker, M.L., Frankhauser, P., Thomas, I.: Using fractal dimensions for characterizing intra-urban diversity: the example of Brussels. Geogr. Anal. 35, 310–329 (2003)
de Nijs, T.C.M., de Niet, R., Crommentuijn, L.: Constructing land-use maps of the Netherlands in 2030. J. Environ. Manag. 72, 35–42 (2004)
Dungan, J.L.: Focusing on feature-based differences in map comparison. J. Geogr. Syst. 8, 131–143 (2006)
Engelen, G., White, R., de Nijs, T.: Environment Explorer: spatial support system for the integrated assessment of socio-economic and environmental policies in the Netherlands. Integr. Assess 4, 97–105 (2003)
Engelen, G., White, R., Uljee, I., Drazan, P.: Using cellular automata for integrated modelling of socio-environmental systems. Environ. Monit Assess 34, 203–214 (1995)
Foody, G.M.: Status of land cover classification accuracy assessment. Remote Sens. Environ. 80, 185–201 (2002)
Hagen-Zanker, A.: Map comparison methods that simultaneously address overlap and structure. J. Geogr. Syst. 8, 165–185 (2006)
Hagen-Zanker, A., Lajoie, G.: Neutral models of landscape change as benchmarks in the assessment of model performance. Landsc Urban Plan 86, 284–296 (2008)
Hagen, A.: Fuzzy set approach to assessing similarity of categorical maps. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 17, 235–249 (2003)
Heidke, P.: Berechnung des Erfolges und der Gute der Windstarkevorhersagen im Sturmwarnungsdienst. Geogr. Annal 8, 301–349 (1926)
Jantz, C.A., Goetz, S.J.: Analysis of scale dependencies in an urban land-use-change model. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 19, 217–241 (2005)
Kocabas, V., Dragicevic, S.: Assessing cellular automata model behaviour using a sensitivity analysis approach. Comput. Environ. Urban Syst. 30, 921–953 (2006)
Kok, K., Farrow, A., Veldkamp, A., Verburg, P.H.: A method and application of multi-scale validation in spatial land use models. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 85, 223–238 (2001)
McGarigal, K., Cushman, S.A., Neel, M.C., Ene, R.: FRAGSTATS: Spatial Pattern Analysis Program for Categorical Maps. University of Massachusetts (2002), www.umass.edu/landeco/research/fragstats/fragstats.html (accessed October 14, 2008)
Monserud, R.A., Leemans, R.: Comparing global vegetation maps with the Kappa statistic. Ecol. Model 62, 275–293 (1992)
Pontius Jr., R.G.: Quantification error versus location error in comparison of categorical maps. Photogramm Eng. Remote Sens. 66, 1011–1016 (2000)
Pontius Jr., R.G.: Statistical methods to partition effects of quantity and location during comparison of categorical maps at multiple resolutions. Photogramm Eng. Remote Sens. 68, 1041–1049 (2002)
Pontius Jr., R.G., Huffaker, D., Denman, K.: Useful techniques of validation for spatially explicit land-change models. Ecol. Model 179, 445–461 (2004)
Pontius Jr., R.G., Boersma, W., Castella, J.-C., Clarke, K., de Nijs, T., Dietzel, C., Zengqiang, D., Fotsing, E., Goldstein, N., Kok, K., Koomen, E., Lippitt, C.D., McConnell, W., Pijanowski, B., Pithadia, S., Sood, A.M., Sweeney, S., Trung, T.N., Veldkamp, A.T., Verburg, P.H.: Comparing the input, output, and validation maps for several models of land change. Ann. Reg. Sci. 42, 11–37 (2008)
Refsgaard, J.C., Henriksen, H.J.: Modelling guidelines: terminology and guiding principles. Adv. Water Resour. 27, 71–82 (2004)
Schelling, T.C.: Dynamic models of segregation. J. Math. Sociology 1, 143–186 (1971)
Schweitzer, F., Steinbink, J.: Urban cluster growth: Analysis and computer simulations of urban aggregations. In: Schweitzer, F. (ed.) Self-organization of complex structures: From individual to collective dynamics, pp. 501–518. Gordon & Breach, London (1997)
Takeyama, M., Couclelis, H.: Map dynamics: integrating cellular automata and GIS through geo-algebra. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 11, 73–91 (1997)
Turner, M.G.: Landscape ecology: What is the state of the science? Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 36, 319–344 (2005)
Turner, M.G., Costanza, R., Sklar, F.H.: Methods to evaluate the performance of spatial simulation-models. Ecol. Model 48, 1–18 (1989)
van Delden, H., Engelen, G.: Combining participatory approaches and modelling: lessons from two practical cases of policy support. In: International Environmental Modelling and Software Society (2006), http://www.iemss.org/iemss2006/sessions/all.html (accessed October 14, 2008)
van Vliet, J.: Validation of land use change models: a case study on the Environment Explorer. Universiteit Wageningen (2006), http://www.lumos.info/publications-en.php (accessed October 14, 2008)
White, R.: Pattern based map comparisons. J. Geogr. Syst. 8, 145–164 (2006)
White, R., Engelen, G.: High-resolution integrated modelling of the spatial dynamics of urban and regional systems. Comput. Environ. Urban Syst. 24, 383–400 (2000)
White, R., Engelen, G., Uljee, I.: The use of constrained cellular automata for high-resolution modelling of urban land-use dynamics. Environ Plan B: Plan Des. 24, 323–343 (1997)
White, R., Engelen, G., Uljee, I., Lavalle, C., Ehrlich, D.: Developing an urban land use simulator for European cities. In: Fullerton, E. (ed.) Proceedings of the 5th EC-GIS Workshop held in Stresa, Italy, European Commission, Joint Research Centre Ispra, June 28-30, pp. 179–190 (2000)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hagen-Zanker, A., Martens, P. (2011). A Framework of Map Comparison Methods to Evaluate Geosimulation Models from a Geospatial Perspective. In: Murgante, B., Borruso, G., Lapucci, A. (eds) Geocomputation, Sustainability and Environmental Planning. Studies in Computational Intelligence, vol 348. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-19733-8_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-19733-8_14
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-19732-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-19733-8
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)