Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

Automatic Landform Recognition, Extraction, and Classification using Kernel Pattern Modeling

  • Published:
Journal of Geovisualization and Spatial Analysis Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Detection of terrain features more quickly and accurately is crucial in geosciences for the extracting and classifying landforms. Part of the local relief attributes would be lost in employing the conventional TPI (Topographic Position Index)-based methods to recognize terrain characteristics (landform recognition, extraction, and classification) due to use of the central tendency index (mean index). As a result, the automated recognition, extraction, and classification of terrain features (summit/ridge and pit/drainage) were performed in this research using the kernel pattern modeling based on digital elevation model (DEM) in the raster grid structure. Accordingly, three novel TPI-based algorithms including simple multi-level recognition system (SMRS), complex multi-level recognition system (CMRS), and central position recognition system (CPRS) were developed to recognize the terrain similarity to summit/ridgeline or terrain convex surfaces (and/or deviation from the pit/drainage or terrain concave surfaces). The algorithms were formulated and programmed using Python programming language and integrated in a software package as well. The results show that the SMRS algorithm tends to have more binary gradation (higher contrast) in smaller dimensions of the moving window, being problematic in some geovisual and cartographical applications. Output of the CPRS algorithm shows more continuity and better performance in the extraction of summit points in a vector data model format. All the three algorithms apply greater degree of generalization to the results as size of the moving window becomes larger. The accuracy assessment, sensitivity analysis, and possible sources of the errors were evaluated. Finally feature extraction and landform classification performed based on output results of the algorithms. The accuracy assessment and validation of the models were examined compared to the TPI and DEV (deviation from mean elevation) models by means of the D8 (for drainage path extraction) and inverted D8 (for ridgeline extraction) algorithms. Accordingly, all the developed algorithms perform better than the conventional method of TPI. The SMRS (88.87%) and then CPRS (64.53%) performed better than the other algorithms and TPI (56.83%). The DEV performance (59.52%) is similar to CMRS (59.19%) and better than TPI. Based on the temporal sensitivity analysis, CMRS and SMRS are the most and least sensitive algorithms to the moving window size and spatial resolution variations, respectively. The possible error sources (edge effect, kernel local pattern, and point vectorization) were evaluated for the algorithms. Then, feature extraction (including summit/ridge or pit/drainage) was implemented on outputs of the algorithms. The CMRS and CPRS models displayed better performance in the vector point extraction compared to the other algorithms. A new landform classification system including 25 classes was also designed based on outputs of the developed algorithms combined with the terrain elevation variable. Landform classification maps generated based on the SMRS algorithm is visually different from what provided by the other algorithms and the CPRS landform classification performed better in distinguishing land units. The kernel size variations can modify landform recognition and classification scale in such a way that whatever size of the moving window is larger, the landform unit generalization is greater.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19
Fig. 20
Fig. 21

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

The software generated during the current study is available in https://github.com/kouroshshirani/SummitDetecor-

LandformClassifer. Short films to instruct installation and usage of the software can be found in the link as well.

References

  • Adediran AO, Parcharidis I, Poscolieri M, Pavlopoulos K (2004) Computer-assisted discrimination of morphological units on north-central Crete (Greece) by applying multivariate statistics to local relief gradients. Geomorphology 58(1–4):357–370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anders NS, Seijmonsbergen AC, Bouten W (2011) Segmentation optimization and stratified object-based analysis for semi-automated geomorphological mapping. Remote Sens Environ 115(12):2976–2985

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Argyriou AV, Teeuw RM, Sarris A (2017) GIS-based landform classification of Bronze Age archaeological sites on Crete Island. PLoS ONE 12(2):e0170727. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0170727

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barka I, Vladovic J, Malis F (2011) Landform classification and its application in predictive mapping of soil and forest units. In: Horak J, Hlasny T, Ruzicka J, Halounova L, Cerba O (eds), GIS Ostrava 2011–The 8th International Symposium. Ostrava: Technical University of Ostrava, pp 143–157

  • Bates RL, Jackson JA (eds) (2005) Glossary of Geology, 5th edn. American Geological Institute, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Behrens T, Zhu AX, Schmidt K, Scholten T (2010) Multi-scale digital terrain analysis and feature selection for digital soil mapping. Geoderma 155(3–4):175–185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bishop MA (2009) A generic classification for the morphological and spatial complexity of volcanic (and other) landforms. Geomorphology 111(1–2):104–109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bishop MP, James LA, Shroder JF, Walsh SJ (2012) Geospatial technologies and digital geomorphological mapping: Concepts, issues and research. Geomorphology 137(1):5–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bugnicourt P, Guitet S, Santos VF, Blanc L, Sotta ED, Barbier N, Couteron P (2018) Using textural analysis for regional landform and landscape mapping, Eastern Guiana Shield. Geomorphology 317:23–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Change KT (2019) Introduction to Geographic Information Systems. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Chauniyal DD, Dutta S (2018) Application of topographic position index for classification of landforms in Dudhatoli Region of Garhwal Himalaya, Uttarakhand. J Indian Geomorphol 6:28–41

    Google Scholar 

  • Cunha NS, Magalhães MR, Domingos T, Abreu MM, Withing K (2018) The land morphology concept and mapping method and its application to mainland Portugal. Geoderma 325:72–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Reu J, Bourgeois J, Bats M, Zwertvaegher A, Gelorini V, De Smedt P, Chu W, Antrop M, De Maeyer P, Finke P, Van Meirvenne M, Verniers J, Crombé P (2013) Application of the topographic position index to heterogeneous landscapes. Geomorphology 186:39–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2012.12.015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dikau R (1990) Geomorphic landform modelling based on hierarchy theory, presented at the 4th International Symposium on Spatial Data Handling, Switzerland

  • Doroozi R, Vaccaro C, Masoudi F, Petrini R (2016) Cretaceous alkaline volcanism in south Marzanabad, northern central Alborz, Iran: Geochemistry and petrogenesis. Geosci Front 7:937–951

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drăguţ L, Eisank C (2011) Automated object-based classification of topography from SRTM data. Geomorphology 141–142:21–33

    Google Scholar 

  • Duda RO, Hart PE, Stork DG (2000) Pattern Classification, 2nd edn. John Wiley & Sons, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallant JC, Wilson JP (2000) Primary topographic attributes. In: Wilson, J.P., Gallant, J.C. (Eds.), Terrain Analysis: Principles and Applications. John Wiley & Sons, New York

  • Garcia GPB, Grohmann CH (2019) DEM-based geomorphological mapping and landforms characterization of a tropical karst environment in southeastern Brazil. J South Am Earth Sci 93:14–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gruber FE, Baruck J, Geitner C (2017) Algorithms vs. surveyors: a comparison of automated landform delineations and surveyed topographic positions from soil mapping in an Alpine environment. Geoderma 308:9–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guitet S, Cornu JF, Brunaux O, Betbeder J, Carozza JM, Hansen RC (2013) Landform and landscape mapping, French Guiana (South America). J Maps 9(3):325–335. https://doi.org/10.1080/17445647.2013.785371

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hengl T, Reuter HI (2009) Geomorphometry: Concepts, Software, Applications. Elsevier, Amsterdam

  • Iwahashi J, Pike RJ (2007) Automated classifications of topography from DEMs by an unsupervised nested-means algorithm and a three-part geometric signature. Geomorphology 86(3–4):409–440

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenness J (2006) Topographic Position Index (tpi_jen.avx) extension for ArcView 3.x. Jenness Enterprises, Arizona

  • Jasiewicz J, Netzel P, Stepinski TF (2014) Landscape similarity, retrieval, and machine mapping of physiographic units. Geomorphology 221:104–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jiang L, Ling D, Zhao M, Wang C, Liang Q, Liu K (2018) Effective identification of terrain positions from gridded DEM data using multimodal classification integration. ISPRS Int J Geo-Inf 7(11):443. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi7110443

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jorge MG, Brennand TA (2017) Semi-automated extraction of longitudinal subglacial bedforms from digital terrain models – Two new methods. Geomorphology 288:148–163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kramm T, Hoffmeister D, Curdt C, Maleki S, Khormali F, Kehl M (2017) Accuracy assessment of landform classification approaches on different spatial scales for the Iranian loess plateau. ISPRS Int J Geo-Inf 6(11):366

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lane SN, Richards KS, Chandler JH (1998) Landform monitoring, modelling and analysis. Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  • Li Z, Zhu Q, Gold C (2005) Digital terrain modeling: principles and methodology. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL

    Google Scholar 

  • Migoń P, Kasprzak M, Traczyk A (2013) How high-resolution DEM based on airborne LiDAR helped to reinterpret landforms – examples from the Sudetes, SW Poland. Landform Analysis 22:89–101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mithan HT, Hales TH, Cleall PJ (2019) Supervised classification of landforms in Arctic mountains. Permafr Periglac Process 30(3):131–145

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore ID, Nieber JL (1989) Landscape assessment of soil erosion and non-point source pollution. J Minn Acad Sci 55(1):18–25

    Google Scholar 

  • Nair HC, Joseph A, Padmakumari Gopinathan V (2018) GIS Based landform classification using digital elevation model: a case study from two river basins of Southern Western Ghats, Kerala, India. Model Earth Syst Environ 4:1355–1363. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40808-018-0490-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ngunjiri MW, Libohova Z, Owens PR, Schulze DG (2020) Landform pattern recognition and classification for predicting soil types of the Uasin Gishu Plateau. Kenya Catena 188:104390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Callaghan JF, Mark DM (1984) The extraction of drainage networks from digital elevation data. Comput graph image process 28(3):323–344

  • Orlandini S, Moretti G, Franchini M, Aldigheri B, Testa B (2003) Path-based methods for the determination of nondispersive drainage directions in grid-based digital elevation models, Water Resour Res 39(6):1144. https://doi.org/10.1029/2002WR001639

  • Pedersen GBM (2016) Semi-automatic classification of glaciovolcanic landforms: an object-based mapping approach based on geomorphometry. J Volcanol Geotherm Res 311:29–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pennock DJ (2003) Terrain attributes, landform segmentation, and soil redistribution. Soil Tillage Res 69(1–2):15–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piloyan A, Konečný M (2017) Semi-automated classification of landform elements in Armenia based on SRTM DEM using K-means unsupervised classification. Quaest Geogr 36(1):93–103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prima ODA, Echigo A, Yokoyama R, Yoshida T (2006) Supervised landform classification of Northeast Honshu from DEM-derived thematic maps. Geomorphology 78:373–386

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quinn P, Beven K, Chevallier P, Planchon O (1991) The prediction of hillslope flow paths for distributed hydrological modelling using digital terrain models. Hydrol Process 5(1):59–79

  • Roy L, Das S (2021) GIS-based landform and LULC classifications in the Sub-Himalayan Kaljani Basin: special reference to 2016 Flood. Egypt J Remote Sens Space Sci 24(3):755–767. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrs.2021.06.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saadat H, Bonnell R, Sharifi F, Mehuys G, Namdar M, Ale-Ebrahim S (2008) Landform classification from a digital elevation model and satellite imagery. Geomorphology 100(3–4):453–464. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2008.01.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwanghart W, Groom G, Kuhn NJ, Heckrath G (2013) Flow network derivation from a high-resolution DEM in a low relief, agrarian landscape. Earth Surf Process Landf 38(13):1576–1586

    Google Scholar 

  • Sofia G (2020) Combining geomorphometry, feature extraction techniques and Earth-surface processes research: The way forward. Geomorphology 355:107055

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tadono T, Ishida H, Oda F, Naito S, Minakawa K, Iwamoto H (2014) Precise global DEM generation by ALOS PRISM. ISPRS Ann Photogramm Remote Sens Spat Inf Sci 2–4:71–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tagil S, Jenness J (2008) GIS-based automated landform classification and topographic, land cover and geologic attributes of landforms around the Yazoren Polje. Turkey J Appl Sci 8(6):910–921

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Takaku J, Tadono T, Tsutsui K (2014) Generation of high-resolution global DSM from ALOS PRISM. ISPRS Ann Photogramm Remote Sens Spat Inf Sci 4:243–248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tarboton DG (1997) A new method for determination of flow directions and upslope areas in grid digital elevation models. Water Resour Res 33(2):309–317

  • Torres RN, Milani F, Fraternali P (2019) Algorithms for mountain peaks discovery: a comparison, Association for Computing Machinery. SAC '19: Proceedings of the 34th ACM/SIGAPP Symposium on Applied Computing 667–674. https://doi.org/10.1145/3297280.3297343.

  • Vannametee E, Babel LV, Hendriks MR, Schuur J, de Jong SM, Bierkens MFP, Karssenberg D (2014) Semi-automated mapping of landforms using multiple point geostatistics. Geomorphology 221:298–319

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wei Z, He H, Hao H, Gao W (2017) Automated mapping of landforms through the application of supervised classification to lidAR-derived DEMs and the identification of earthquake ruptures. Int J Remote Sens 38(23):7196–7219. https://doi.org/10.1080/01431161.2017.1372861

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weiss A (2001) Topographic position and landforms Analysis. Poster presentation, ESRI user Conference, San Diego, C.A.

  • Xiong LY, Zhu AX, Zhang L, Tang GA (2018) Drainage basin object-based method for regional-scale landform classification: a case study of loess area in China. Phys Geogr 39(6):523–541. https://doi.org/10.1080/02723646.2018.1442062

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao WF, Xiong LY, Ding H, Tang GA (2017) Automatic recognition of loess landforms using Random Forest method. J Mt Sci 14:885–897

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhu H, Xu Y, Cheng Y, Liu H, Zhao Y (2019) Landform classification based on optimal texture feature extraction from DEM data in Shandong Hilly Area, China. Front Earth Sci 13:641–655. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11707-019-0751-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The article has been prepared through a research project conducted by the authors and financially supported by Soil Conservation and Watershed Management Research Department, Isfahan Agricultural and Natural Resources, Research and Education Center, AREEO, Iran. The authors acknowledge the financial support.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Soil Conservation and Watershed Management Research Institute (SCWMRI), Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Tehran, Iran

    Kourosh Shirani

  2. Soil Conservation and Watershed Management Research Department, Isfahan Agricultural and Natural Resources, Research and Education Center, AREEO, Isfahan, Iran

    Sina Solhi

  3. Department of Geology, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran

    Mehrdad Pasandi

Authors
  1. Kourosh Shirani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sina Solhi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mehrdad Pasandi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kourosh Shirani.

Ethics declarations

Ethical Approval

The research does not involve human, animal, or tissues.

Informed Consent

The authors agree with the contents of the manuscript and have consented to the submission.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

The authors certify that the submission is original work and is not published/ under review at any other publication. All sources used are properly cited.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Shirani, K., Solhi, S. & Pasandi, M. Automatic Landform Recognition, Extraction, and Classification using Kernel Pattern Modeling. J geovis spat anal 7, 2 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41651-022-00131-z

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41651-022-00131-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation