Analysing the effect of different aggregation approaches on remotely sensed data

The effect of spatial aggregation varies depending on the aggregation logic. This study examined and compared the effect of both categorical and numerical aggregation. Categorical aggregation focused on the majority rule-based (MRB), random rule-based (RRB), and point-centred distance-weighted moving window (PDW). Both RRB and PDW have a stochastic component. Numerical aggregation focused on mean aggregation and central pixel resampling (CPR). The change in class proportions and landscape metrics with respect to a fine-resolution base image were assessed. RRB, PDW, and CPR preserved class proportion with decreasing spatial resolution. MRB increased the proportion of the dominant class and decreased all other class proportions, whereas mean aggregation increased the proportion of non-dominant class. All approaches led to a less clumped pattern for each class, except MRB, which made the dominant class more clumped. For all classes, RRB, PDW, and CPR led to a lower distortion in shape complexity than MRB and mean aggregation. RRB responded similarly for all realizations, but variability in PDW could be minimized by choosing a specific parameter value. The study showed that RRB, PDW, and CPR can be used in, for example, studies on ecological resource management where consistency of the class proportions at coarser resolutions is required, and that PDW is the best option. MRB can be used in regional-level as well as national-level agriculture or forest planning, where the delineation of the dominant class is required.

[1]  Stan Openshaw,et al.  Modifiable Areal Unit Problem , 2008, Encyclopedia of GIS.

[2]  M. Fortin,et al.  Spatial statistics, spatial regression, and graph theory in ecology , 2012 .

[3]  Valerie I. Cullinan,et al.  A comparison of quantitative methods for examining landscape pattern and scale , 1992, Landscape Ecology.

[4]  A. Steina,et al.  Issues of scale for environmental indicators , 2001 .

[5]  T. S. Prasad,et al.  Upscaling aspects of multi-resolution satellite data in spatial and frequency domains , 2002 .

[6]  C. Woodcock,et al.  The factor of scale in remote sensing , 1987 .

[7]  M. Goodchild,et al.  Scale in Remote Sensing and GIS , 2023 .

[8]  Bruce T. Milne,et al.  Indices of landscape pattern , 1988, Landscape Ecology.

[9]  Jianguo Wu,et al.  Use and misuse of landscape indices , 2004, Landscape Ecology.

[10]  Hong S. He,et al.  Effects of spatial aggregation approaches on classified satellite imagery , 2002, Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci..

[11]  Santiago Saura,et al.  Effects of remote sensor spatial resolution and data aggregation on selected fragmentation indices , 2004, Landscape Ecology.

[12]  Ambica Paliwal,et al.  The impact of modifiable areal unit problem on estimation of lake extent , 2011 .

[13]  R. O'Neill,et al.  A factor analysis of landscape pattern and structure metrics , 1995, Landscape Ecology.

[14]  R. Gardner,et al.  A new approach for rescaling land cover data , 2008, Landscape Ecology.

[15]  Hong S. He,et al.  An aggregation index (AI) to quantify spatial patterns of landscapes , 2000, Landscape Ecology.

[16]  C. Woodcock,et al.  Theory and methods for accuracy assessment of thematic maps using fuzzy sets , 1994 .

[17]  R. K. Gupta,et al.  Problems in upscaling of high resolution remote sensing data to coarse spatial resolution over land surface , 2000 .

[18]  Ling Bian,et al.  Comparing Effects of Aggregation Methods on Statistical and Spatial Properties of Simulated Spatial Data , 1999 .

[19]  Arko Lucieer,et al.  Interactive and visual fuzzy classification of remotely sensed imagery for exploration of uncertainty , 2004, Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci..

[20]  Qinghua Ye,et al.  Handling uncertainties in image mining for remote sensing studies , 2009 .

[21]  Russell G. Congalton,et al.  A review of assessing the accuracy of classifications of remotely sensed data , 1991 .

[22]  Aaron Moody,et al.  The influence of scale and the spatial characteristics of landscapes on land-cover mapping using remote sensing , 1995, Landscape Ecology.

[23]  Jianguo Wu,et al.  Empirical patterns of the effects of changing scale on landscape metrics , 2002, Landscape Ecology.

[24]  Jianya Gong,et al.  Effects of Aggregation Methods on Image Classification , 2010 .

[25]  Bruce T. Milne,et al.  Effects of changing spatial scale on the analysis of landscape pattern , 1989, Landscape Ecology.

[26]  Y. Hao,et al.  Landscape metric performance in analyzing two decades of deforestation in the Amazon Basin of Rondonia, Brazil , 2006 .