Accuracy of interpolation techniques for the derivation of digital elevation models in relation to landform types and data density

One of the most important scientific challenges of digital elevation modeling is the development of numerical representations of large areas with a high resolution. Although there have been many studies on the accuracy of interpolation techniques for the generation of digital elevation models (DEMs) in relation to landform types and data quantity or density, there is still a need to evaluate the performance of these techniques on natural landscapes of differing morphologies and over a large range of scales. To perform such an evaluation, we investigated a total of six sites, three in the mountainous region of northern Laos and three in the more gentle landscape of western France, with various surface areas from micro-plots, hillslopes, and catchments. The techniques used for the interpolation of point height data with density values from 4 to 109 points/km2 include: inverse distance weighting (IDW), ordinary kriging (OK), universal kriging (UK), multiquadratic radial basis function (MRBF), and regularized spline with tension (RST). The study sites exhibited coefficients of variation (CV) of altitude between 12% and 78%, and isotropic to anisotropic spatial structures with strengths from weak (with a nugget/sill ratio of 0.8) to strong (0.01). Irrespective of the spatial scales or the variability and spatial structure of altitude, few differences existed between the interpolation methods if the sampling density was high, although MRBF performed slightly better. However, at lower sampling densities, kriging yielded the best estimations for landscapes with strong spatial structure, low CV and low anisotropy, while RST yielded the best estimations for landscapes with low CV and weak spatial structure. Under conditions of high CV, strong spatial structure and strong anisotropy, IDW performed slightly better than the other method. The prediction errors in height estimation are discussed in relation to the possible interactions with spatial scale, landform types, and data density. These results indicate that the accuracy of interpolation techniques for DEM generation should be tested not only in relation to landform types and data density but also to their applicability to multi-scales.

[1]  James Brasington,et al.  Interactions between model predictions, parameters and DTM scales for TOPMODEL , 1998 .

[2]  P. Burrough,et al.  Principles of geographical information systems , 1998 .

[3]  G. Matheron.  Principles of geostatistics , 1963 .

[4]  Peter F. Fisher,et al.  Assessing interpolation accuracy in elevation models , 1993, IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications.

[5]  M. Borga,et al.  On the interpolation of hydrologic variables: formal equivalence of multiquadratic surface fitting and kriging , 1997 .

[6]  Geoffrey M. Laslett,et al.  Kriging and Splines: An Empirical Comparison of their Predictive Performance in Some Applications , 1994 .

[7]  H. Mitásová,et al.  Interpolation by regularized spline with tension: I. Theory and implementation , 1993 .

[8]  Arnold K. Bregt,et al.  The performance of spatial interpolation methods and choropleth maps to estimate properties at points: a soil survey case study. , 1996 .

[9]  R. Franke.  Scattered data interpolation: tests of some methods , 1982 .

[10]  Amy J. Ruggles,et al.  An Experimental Comparison of Ordinary and Universal Kriging and Inverse Distance Weighting , 1999 .

[11]  Manuel A. Aguilar,et al.  Effects of Terrain Morphology, Sampling Density, and Interpolation Methods on Grid DEM Accuracy , 2005 .

[12]  Jay C. Bell,et al.  Digital elevation model resolution: effects on terrain attribute calculation and quantitative soil-landscape modeling , 2001 .

[13]  Nicholas I. Fisher,et al.  Statistical Analysis of Spherical Data. , 1987 .

[14]  Chi-Hua Huang,et al.  An Instantaneous‐Profile Laser Scanner to Measure Soil Surface Microtopography , 2003 .

[15]  Franky Albert Noël Declercq,et al.  Interpolation Methods for Scattered Sample Data: Accuracy, Spatial Patterns, Processing Time , 1996 .

[16]  C. Fraser,et al.  Quality Assessment Of Digital Surface Models Generated From IKONOS Imagery , 2005 .

[17]  D. Weber,et al.  Evaluation and comparison of spatial interpolators II , 1992 .

[18]  Alex B. McBratney,et al.  Further Comparison of Spatial Methods for Predicting Soil pH , 1990 .

[19]  Paul A. Longley,et al.  Geographical information systems : principles, techniques, management, and applications , 2005 .

[20]  Jaroslav Hofierka,et al.  Interpolation by regularized spline with tension: II. Application to terrain modeling and surface geometry analysis , 1993 .

[21]  T. Toutin,et al.  Comparison of automated digital elevation model extraction results using along-track ASTER and across-track SPOT stereo images , 2002 .

[22]  Jay Gao,et al.  Resolution and Accuracy of Terrain Representation by Grid DEMs at a Micro-Scale , 1997, Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci..

[23]  M. Souriau,et al.  Topography of large-scale watersheds: fractal texture and global drift. Application to the Mississippi basin , 1996 .

[24]  K. Beven,et al.  A physically based, variable contributing area model of basin hydrology , 1979 .

[25]  Jacques Gallichand,et al.  Mapping clay content for subsurface drainage in the Nile Delta , 1993 .

[26]  A. Kravchenko.  Influence of Spatial Structure on Accuracy of Interpolation Methods , 2003 .

[27]  S. Robeson.  Spherical Methods for Spatial Interpolation: Review and Evaluation , 1997 .

[28]  Murugesu Sivapalan,et al.  Scale issues in hydrological modelling: A review , 1995 .

[29]  Thierry Toutin,et al.  Impact of terrain slope and aspect on radargrammetric DEM accuracy , 2002 .

[30]  Nicholas I. Fisher,et al.  Statistical Analysis of Spherical Data. , 1987 .

[31]  D. L. Karlen,et al.  Spatial Analysis of Soil Fertility Parameters , 2004, Precision Agriculture.

[32]  Gabriele Bitelli,et al.  Comparison of Techniques for Generating Digital Terrain Models from Contour Lines , 1997, Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci..

[33]  G. Gilat,et al.  Method for smooth approximation of data , 1977 .

[34]  Donald E. Myers,et al.  Spatial interpolation: an overview , 1994 .

[35]  C. Obled,et al.  Objective analyses and mapping techniques for rainfall fields: An objective comparison , 1982 .

[36]  M. Goodchild,et al.  The Fractal Nature of Geographic Phenomena , 1987 .

[37]  John P. Wilson,et al.  Terrain analysis : principles and applications , 2000 .

[38]  V. J. Kollias,et al.  Comparison of Interpolation Methods for the Prediction of Reference Evapotranspiration—An Application in Greece , 2005 .

[39]  Philippe J. J. Desmet,et al.  Effects of Interpolation Errors on the Analysis of DEMs , 1997 .

[40]  Christian Walter,et al.  Improving soil hydromorphy prediction according to DEM resolution and available pedological data , 2000 .

[41]  L. Montefusco,et al.  Radial basis functions for the multivariate interpolation of large scattered data sets , 2002 .

[42]  Budiman Minasny,et al.  On digital soil mapping , 2003 .

[43]  E. O'Loughlin.  Prediction of Surface Saturation Zones in Natural Catchments by Topographic Analysis , 1986 .

[44]  Alex B. McBratney,et al.  HOW MANY OBSERVATIONS ARE NEEDED FOR REGIONAL ESTIMATION OF SOIL PROPERTIES? , 1983 .

[45]  D. Montgomery,et al.  Digital elevation model grid size, landscape representation, and hydrologic simulations , 1994 .

[46]  A. McBratney,et al.  DPTIMAL INTERPOLATION AND ISARITHMIC MAPPING OF SOIL PROPERTIES. IV SAMPLING STRATEGY , 1981 .

[47]  K. Beven,et al.  THE PREDICTION OF HILLSLOPE FLOW PATHS FOR DISTRIBUTED HYDROLOGICAL MODELLING USING DIGITAL TERRAIN MODELS , 1991 .

[48]  Chantal Gascuel-Odoux,et al.  Effects of surface water storage by soil roughness on overland‐flow generation , 2002 .