Error assessment in two lidar-derived TIN datasets

An accuracy assessment of two lidar-derived elevation datasets was conducted in areas of rugged terrain (average slope 26.6°). Data from 906 ground checkpoints in various land-cover types were collected in situ as reference points. Analysis of the accuracy of lidar-derived elevation as a function of several factors including terrain slope, terrain aspect, and land-cover types was conducted. This paper attempts to characterize vegetation information derived from lidar data based on variables such as canopy volume, local roughness of point clouds, point spacing of lidar ground returns, and vegetation angle. This information was used to evaluate the accuracy of elevation as a function of vegetation type. The experimental results revealed that the accuracy of elevation was considerably correlated with five factors: terrain slope, vegetation angle, canopy volume, local roughness of point clouds, and point spacing of lidar ground returns. The results show a linear relationship between the elevation accuracy and the combination of vegetation angle and the point spacing of ground returns (r 2 > 0.9). The combination of vegetation angle and point spacing of ground returns explains a significant amount of the variability in elevation accuracy. Elevation accuracy varied with different vegetation types. The elevation accuracy was also linearly correlated with the product of the point spacing of ground returns and the tangent of the slope (r 2 = 0.9). A greater product value implies a greater elevation error. In addition, with regard to terrain aspect, one dense dataset with extra cross-flight data revealed a lesser impact of aspect on elevation accuracy.

[1]  J. R. Jensen,et al.  Creation of digital terrain models using an adaptive lidar vegetation point removal process , 2002 .

[2]  J. Means,et al.  Predicting forest stand characteristics with airborne scanning lidar , 2000 .

[3]  G. Sithole.  FILTERING OF LASER ALTIMETRY DATA USING A SLOPE ADAPTIVE FILTER , 2001 .

[4]  Mikko Inkinen,et al.  A segmentation-based method to retrieve stem volume estimates from 3-D tree height models produced by laser scanners , 2001, IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote. Sens..

[5]  George Vosselman,et al.  Experimental comparison of filter algorithms for bare-Earth extraction from airborne laser scanning point clouds , 2004 .

[6]  L. M Gomes Pereira,et al.  Suitability of laser data for DTM generation: a case study in the context of road planning and design , 1999 .

[7]  E. Næsset.  Determination of mean tree height of forest stands using airborne laser scanner data , 1997 .

[8]  K. Kraus,et al.  Determination of terrain models in wooded areas with airborne laser scanner data , 1998 .

[9]  George Vosselman,et al.  Report: ISPRS Comparison of Filters , 2003 .

[10]  M. Shirasawa,et al.  Visualizing topography by openness: A new application of image processing to digital elevation models , 2002 .

[11]  P. Axelsson.  DEM Generation from Laser Scanner Data Using Adaptive TIN Models , 2000 .

[12]  H. Maas.  Methods for measuring height and planimetry discrepancies in airborne laserscanner data , 2002 .

[13]  Paul A. Longley,et al.  The Importance of Understanding Error in Lidar Digital Elevation Models , 2004 .

[14]  Emmanuel P. Baltsavias,et al.  Airborne laser scanning: basic relations and formulas , 1999 .

[15]  E. J. Huising,et al.  Errors and accuracy estimates of laser data acquired by various laser scanning systems for topographic applications , 1998 .

[16]  Aloysius Wehr,et al.  Airborne laser scanning—an introduction and overview , 1999 .

[17]  E. Næsset.  Estimating timber volume of forest stands using airborne laser scanner data , 1997 .

[18]  G. Vosselman.  SLOPE BASED FILTERING OF LASER ALTIMETRY DATA , 2000 .

[19]  M. Hodgson,et al.  Accuracy of Airborne Lidar-Derived Elevation: Empirical Assessment and Error Budget , 2004 .

[20]  M. Hodgson,et al.  An evaluation of LIDAR- and IFSAR-derived digital elevation models in leaf-on conditions with USGS Level 1 and Level 2 DEMs , 2003 .