The fractal properties of topography: A comparison of methods

In this study the fractal characteristics of fifty-five digital elevation models from seven different United States physiographic provinces are determined using seven methods. The self-similar fractal model tested in this analysis is found to provide a very good fit for some landscapes, but an imperfect fit for others. Thus, outright rejection of this model does not appear to be warranted, but neither does a blind application. The three implementations of the dividers methods considered in this study consistently produce lower dimensions than those produced by the other methods, and those dimensions consistently do not vary much between surfaces. Although the dimensions produced by the cell counting method (applied to the digital elevation model itself) display consistent intersurface variation, the dimensions are generally lower than those produced by the variogram-based methods. Among the variogram-based methods, the dimensions of the quarter-sections of the digital elevation models are generally greater than the dimensions obtained from the other variogram-based methods. The dimensions produced by the variogram method which considered the surfaces on a directional basis are very similar, on average, to the dimensions produced by the entire-surface variogram.

[1]  A. N. Strahler.  Hypsometric (area-altitude) analysis of erosional topography. , 1952 .

[2]  L F Richardson,et al.  The problem of contiguity : An appendix to statistics of deadly quarrels , 1961 .

[3]  William D. Thornbury.  Regional geomorphology of the United States , 1965 .

[4]  R. Bracewell.  The Fourier Transform and Its Applications , 1966 .

[5]  B. Mandelbrot.  How Long Is the Coast of Britain? Statistical Self-Similarity and Fractional Dimension , 1967, Science.

[6]  D. H. Mating.  How Long is a Piece of String , 1968 .

[7]  B. Mandelbrot,et al.  Fractional Brownian Motions, Fractional Noises and Applications , 1968 .

[8]  B. Mandelbrot.  Stochastic models for the Earth's relief, the shape and the fractal dimension of the coastlines, and the number-area rule for islands. , 1975, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[9]  David M. Mark,et al.  Geomorphometric Parameters: A Review and Evaluation , 1975 .

[10]  B. Mandelbrot,et al.  Fractals: Form, Chance and Dimension , 1978 .

[11]  Benoit B. Mandelbrot,et al.  Fractal Geometry of Nature , 1984 .

[12]  Lars Håkanson,et al.  The length of closed geomorphic lines , 1978 .

[13]  N. Cressie,et al.  Robust estimation of the variogram: I , 1980 .

[14]  M. Goodchild.  Fractals and the accuracy of geographical measures , 1980 .

[15]  H. Schwarz,et al.  The implementation of the concept of fractal dimension on a semi-automatic image analyser , 1980 .

[16]  M. Kent.  Characteristics and Identification of Pasteurella and Vibrio Species Pathogenic to Fishes using API-20E (Analytab Products) Multitube Test Strips , 1982 .

[17]  Clement F. Kent,et al.  An Index of Littoral Zone Complexity and Its Measurement , 1982 .

[18]  Harold Moellering,et al.  Measuring the Fractal Dimensions of Empirical Cartographic Curves , 1982 .

[19]  Mark C Shelberg,et al.  Measuring the Fractal Dimensions of Surfaces , 1983 .

[20]  F. Ahnert,et al.  Local relief and the height limits of mountain ranges , 1984 .

[21]  Alex Pentland,et al.  Fractal-Based Description of Natural Scenes , 1984, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[22]  D. Mark,et al.  Scale-dependent fractal dimensions of topographic surfaces: An empirical investigation, with applications in geomorphology and computer mapping , 1984 .

[23]  Shaun Lovejoy,et al.  Generalized Scale Invariance in the Atmosphere and Fractal Models of Rain , 1985 .

[24]  Dennis E. Hayes,et al.  Quantitative Methods for Analyzing the Roughness of the Seafloor (Paper 5R0105) , 1985 .

[25]  J. Muller,et al.  Fractal Dimension and Inconsistencies in Cartographic Line Representations , 1986 .

[26]  Michael Batty,et al.  The Fractal Simulation of Urban Structure , 1986 .

[27]  W. Culling.  Highly erratic spatial variability of soil pH on Iping Common , 1986 .

[28]  A. C. Armstrong.  On the fractal dimensions of some transient soil properties , 1986 .

[29]  A. McBratney,et al.  Choosing functions for semi‐variograms of soil properties and fitting them to sampling estimates , 1986 .

[30]  Nigel N. Clark,et al.  Three techniques for implementing digital fractal analysis of particle shape , 1986 .

[31]  Stephen R. Brown.  A note on the description of surface roughness using fractal dimension , 1987 .

[32]  W. Culling,et al.  The fractal geometry of the soil—covered landscape , 1987 .

[33]  Georg Skoda,et al.  Fractal dimension of rainbands over Hilly terrain , 1987 .

[34]  Christopher H. Scholz,et al.  Fractal analysis applied to characteristic segments of the San Andreas Fault , 1987 .

[35]  B. Milne.  Measuring the fractal geometry of landscapes , 1988 .

[36]  Heinz-Otto Peitgen,et al.  The science of fractal images , 2011 .

[37]  B. Klinkenberg.  Tests Of A Fractal Model Of Topography , 1988 .

[38]  Naokazu Yokoya,et al.  Fractal-based analysis and interpolation of 3D natural surface shapes and their application to terrain modeling , 1989, Comput. Vis. Graph. Image Process..

[39]  L. E. Gilbert.  Are topographic data sets fractal? , 1989 .

[40]  R. Snow.  Fractal sinuosity of stream channels , 1989 .

[41]  A. D. Abrahams,et al.  Fractal techniques and the surface roughness of talus slopes: Reply , 1989 .

[42]  D. L. Turcotte,et al.  Fractal mapping of digitized images: Application to the topography of Arizona and comparisons with synthetic images , 1989 .

[43]  David J. Unwin,et al.  Fractals and the geosciences: Introduction , 1989 .

[44]  J. Thornes,et al.  Big rills have little rills . . . , 1990, Nature.

[45]  William I. Newman,et al.  Cascade model for fluvial geomorphology , 1990 .