2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.envsoft.2015.04.010
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Spatial neighborhood effect and scale issues in the calibration and validation of a dynamic model of Phragmites australis distribution – A cellular automata and machine learning approach

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

2
4
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 92 publications
2
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The same similarity was observed for the Kappa Simulation index of our model (23.9%) and of others (e.g., 23% in Malek et al [96]; 12%-42% in Ke et al [98] and 15%-52% in Ke et al [99]). Finally, results from the Fuzzy Kappa Simulation analysis (34.1%-35% for moving windows of 2-, 4-, 8-, 16-pixel radius) were also in conformance with the results reported by Altartouri et al [100] (3%-30% for 3 × 3-to 9 × 9-pixel moving windows). Moreover, the K Transition (82.7%) and K TransLoc (28.8%) components of the Kappa Simulation indicate that our model better predicts the area of soy expansion than its allocation [90].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…The same similarity was observed for the Kappa Simulation index of our model (23.9%) and of others (e.g., 23% in Malek et al [96]; 12%-42% in Ke et al [98] and 15%-52% in Ke et al [99]). Finally, results from the Fuzzy Kappa Simulation analysis (34.1%-35% for moving windows of 2-, 4-, 8-, 16-pixel radius) were also in conformance with the results reported by Altartouri et al [100] (3%-30% for 3 × 3-to 9 × 9-pixel moving windows). Moreover, the K Transition (82.7%) and K TransLoc (28.8%) components of the Kappa Simulation indicate that our model better predicts the area of soy expansion than its allocation [90].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…Cell size, neighborhood size, and neighborhood type have highly significant (p < 0.0001) unilateral (X 1 , X 2 , andX 3 ) effects on simulation accuracy and consequently show scale sensitivity (Table 5). This has been demonstrated by previous studies (Kocabas and Dragicevic 2006, Samat 2006, Altartouri et al 2015.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 83%
“…SLEUTH (Clarke et al, 1997, Jafarnezhad et al, 2016, Onsted and Chowdhury, 2014, Rienow and Goetzke, 2015, Sakieh et al, 2015, Silva and Clarke, 2002 is calibrated through a two-step procedure: first, a visual calibration oriented for a broad parameter definition and debugging; second, a brute force calibration procedure where multiple runs are produced in order to generate enough model data to statistically compare reference data. Li and Yeh (2002) and Li et al (2013), Almeida et al (2008), Basse et al (2014) and Altartouri et al (2015) coupled CA models with artificial neural network formulations to calibrate transition rules and other components of the CA models. , and Li et al (2014) used basic sensitivity analysis to calibrate the weighting parameters for the spatial interactions between land uses.…”
Section: A Brief Literature Survey On Cellular Automata Models and Thmentioning
confidence: 99%