[1]蒋广鑫,谢元礼,高志远,等.中国5类典型区域常用DEM高程精度评价[J].水土保持研究,2020,27(05):72-80.
　JIANG Guangxin,XIE Yuanli,GAO Zhiyuan,et al.Evaluation on Elevation Accuracy of Commonly Used DEM in Five Typical Areas of China[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2020,27(05):72-80.
点击复制

中国5类典型区域常用DEM高程精度评价

《水土保持研究》[ISSN:1005-3409/CN:61-1272/P] 卷: 27 期数: 2020年05期 页码: 72-80 栏目: 目次 出版日期: 2020-08-20
Title:
Evaluation on Elevation Accuracy of Commonly Used DEM in Five Typical Areas of China
文章编号:
1005-3409(2020)05-0072-09
作者:
蒋广鑫1,2, 谢元礼1,2,3, 高志远1, 周 鹏1
(1.西北大学 城市与环境学院, 西安 710127; 2.陕西省地表系统与环境承载力重点实验室, 西安 710127; 3.西北大学 地表系统与灾害研究院, 西安 710127)
Author(s):
JIANG Guangxin1,2, XIE Yuanli1,2,3, GAO Zhiyuan1, ZHOU Peng1
(1.College of Urban and Environmental Sciences, Northwest University, Xi'an 710127, China; 2.Shaanxi Key Laboratory of Earth Surface System and Environmental Carrying Capacity, Northwest University, Xi'an 710127, China; 3.Institute of Earth Surface System and Hazards, Northwest University, Xi'an 710127, China)
关键词:
精度评价;  ICESat/GLASGLAH14;  高程误差;  SRTMDEM;  ASTERV2;  地形因子;  地表覆盖
Keywords:
accuracy evaluation;  ICESat/GLAS GLAH14;  elevation error;  SRTM DEM;  ASTER V2;  terrain factors;  land coverage
分类号:
P208
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
探究常用的3种DEM在中国不同地貌区的误差分布特征,为3种DEM在不同研究区的应用提供支撑。选取中国5类典型区(华北平原、黄土高原、青藏高原、塔里木盆地和云贵高原)为研究区域,以ICESat/GLAS GLAH14点数据为参考高程,选取目前最常用的3种DEM数据,SRTM 1 Arc-Second Global(SRTMGL1),SRTM Version 4(SRTM V4),ASTER GDEM V2(ASTER V2)作为精度评价数据,结合地形要素和地表覆盖,对3种DEM在5类研究区域的高程精度进行了对比分析。结果表明:(1)在5类研究区中,总体上SRTMGL1数据精度优于SRTM V4和ASTER V2,其中以塔里木盆地3种DEM精度最高,云贵高原精度最低。(2)不同坡度区间内,SRTMGL1的数据精度皆高于ASTER V2和SRTM V4,平原地区(<10°),SRTM两类DEM精度相近,可互为补充,高植被覆盖、大坡度区域,SRTMGL1数据精度一般为最优,ASTER V2精度优于SRTM V4。(3)坡向对于3种DEM的影响较小,误差分布较均匀。(4)3种DEM在耕地和人造表面覆盖区域的精度最高,在林地覆盖区域,DEM精度最低。(5)不同地貌对3种DEM的精度具有较大的影响。SRTMGL1精度最优且受地形和地表覆盖影响最小,其次,SRTM V4在平原地区精度较好,受地形影响最大,ASTER V2在植被覆盖的地貌复杂区域精度较好,两者互有优劣。
Abstract:
This study explored the error distribution characteristics of 3 commonly used DEMs in different landform areas in China to support for application of 3 DEMs in different research area. This study selected 5 typical regions of China(North China Plain, Loess Plateau, Qinghai-Tibet Plateau, Tarim Basin and Yunnan-Guizhou Plateau)as research areas, with ICESat/GLAS GLAH14 points data as the reference elevation, and 3 most commonly used DEM data, SRTM 1 Arc-Second Global(SRTMGL1), SRTM Version 4(SRTM V4), ASTER GDEM V2(ASTER V2)were selected as the accuracy evaluation data. Combined with terrain factors and land coverage, a comparative analysis about the elevation accuracy of the 3 DEMs in the 5 types of research areas was made. The results show that:(1)in the 5 types of research areas, the SRTMGL1 data accuracy is better than SRTM V4 and ASTER V2 in general, among which the 3 kinds of DEM in the Tarim Basin have the highest precision and that in the Yunnan-Guizhou plateau has the lowest precision;(2)the data accuracy of SRTMGL1 is higher than that of ASTER V2 and SRTM V4 in different slopes; the plain area(<10°), two types of SRTM DEM have similar precision, which can complement each other; in high vegetation coverage and large slope area, SRTMGL1's data accuracy is generally optimal, ASTER V2's accuracy is close to SRTMGL1's, and SRTM V4 is the most affected by slope and has the lowest accuracy;(3)the aspect has little effect on the 3 types of DEM and can be ignored;(4)the 3 types of DEM have the highest precision in the area covered by cultivated land and artificial surface, and the DEMs have the lowest precision in the forest coverage area;(5)different geomorphological divisions have the greater impact on the accuracy of the 3 DEMs. SRTMGL1 has the best accuracy and is least affected by terrain and surface coverage. Secondly, SRTM V4 has better accuracy in the plain area and is most affected by the terrain, ASTER V2 has better accuracy in the area with complex landforms and covered by vegetation, and both have their own advantages and disadvantages.

参考文献/References:

[1]Suwandana E, Kawamura K, Sakuno Y, et al. Evaluation of ASTER GDEM2 in comparison with GDEM1, SRTM DEM and topographic-map-derived DEM using inundation area analysis and RTK-dGPS data[J]. Remote Sensing, 2012,4(8):2419-2431.
[2]Li P, Shi C, Li Z, et al. Evaluation of ASTER GDEM ver2 using GPS measurements and SRTM ver4.1 in China[J]. Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, 2012(1/4):181-186.
[3]Zhao S, Cheng W, Zhou C, et al. Accuracy assessment of the ASTER GDEM and SRTM3 DEM:an example in the Loess Plateau and North China Plain of China[J]. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 2011,32(23):8081-8093.
[4]Jobin Thomas, V. Prasannakumar. Comparison of basin morphometry derived from topographic maps, ASTER and SRTM DEMs:an example from Kerala, India[J]. Geocarto International, 2015,30(3):346-364.
[5]赵尚民,何维灿,王莉. DEM数据在黄土高原典型地貌区的误差分布[J].测绘科学,2016,41(2):67-70,102.
[6]南希,李爱农,边金虎,等.典型山区SRTM3与ASTER GDEM数据精度对比分析:以青藏高原东麓深切河谷区为例[J].地球信息科学学报,2015,17(1):91-98.
[7]Jing C, Shortridge A, Lin S, et al. Comparison and validation of SRTM and ASTER GDEM for a subtropical landscape in Southeastern China[J]. International Journal of Digital Earth, 2014,7(12):969-992.
[8]胡加佩,关小荣,刘学军.中国区域SRTM DEM与ASTER GDEM误差空间分布特征[J].地理与地理信息科学,2017,33(4):28-33.
[9]武文娇,章诗芳,赵尚民. SRTM1 DEM与ASTER GDEM V2数据的对比分析[J].地球信息科学学报,2017,19(8):1108-1115.
[10]高志远,谢元礼,王宁练,等.青藏高原地区3种全球DEM精度对不同地形因子的响应[J].水土保持通报,2019,39(2):184-191.
[11]李国元,唐新明,张重阳,等.多准则约束的ICESat/GLAS高程控制点筛选[J].遥感学报,2017,21(1):96-104.
[12]艾建华.利用ICESAT/GLAS激光测高数据评估SRTM数据精度[J].测绘技术装备,2015,17(2):63-66.
[13]吴宇鑫,赵牡丹,高志远,等.中国3类典型区SRTMGL1和SRTM V4精度对比分析[J].水土保持研究,2019,26(4):36-42.
[14]陈楠,汤国安,朱红春.不同空间分辨率DEM提取坡度不确定性研究[J].水土保持研究,2006,13(3):157-160.
[15]Zhang Q, Yang Q, Wang C. SRTM Error Distribution and its Associations with Landscapes across China[J]. Photogrammetric Engineering & Remote Sensing, 2016,82(2):135-148.
[16]杨小艳,陈龙高,陈龙乾,等.基于土地利用类型的ASTER GDEM精度评价:以连云港为例[J].中国矿业大学学报,2016,45(2):377-385.
[17]吴文斌,杨鹏,张莉,等.4类全球土地覆盖数据在中国区域的精度评价[J].农业工程学报,2009,25(12):167-173,407.
[18]胡鹏,吴艳兰,胡海.数字高程模型精度评定的基本理论[J].地球信息科学学报,2012,5(3):64-70.
[19]张泉,杨勤科,程洁,等.中国地区3″SRTM高程误差特征[J].武汉大学学报:信息科学版,2018,43(5):684-690.

相似文献/References:

[1]陆广勇,杨勤科,张少伟,等.基于线性光谱混合模型分解MODIS多光谱影像的研究[J].水土保持研究,2011,18(03):10.
　LU Guang-yong,YANG Qin-ke,ZHANG Shao-wei,et al.Classification of MODIS Multispectral Images Based on Line Spectral Mixture Model[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2011,18(05):10.
[2]张笑,陈刚,段淼然,等.南方复合地貌区DEM内插算法的对比研究[J].水土保持研究,2015,22(05):106.
　ZHANG Xiao,CHEN Gang,DUAN Miaoran,et al.Comparative Study of Different DEM Interpolation Algorithms in the Southern Complex Geomorphologic Zone[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2015,22(05):106.
[3]胡云华,贺秀斌,毕景芝.直方图匹配算法进行坡度变换的精度评价[J].水土保持研究,2013,20(06):97.
　HU Yun-hua,HE Xiu-bin,BI Jing-zhi.Assessment on the Accuracy of the Histogram Matching Algorithm for Slope Correction[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2013,20(05):97.

备注/Memo

收稿日期:2019-10-25修回日期:2019-12-25
资助项目:中国科学院“一带一路”科技合作专项“中国科学院国际合作局对外合作重点项目”(131C11KYSB20160061); 中国科学院A类战略性先导科技专项“地球大数据科学工程”(XDA19070302)
第一作者:蒋广鑫(1995—),男,江苏省泰州市人,硕士研究生,主要研究地理信息科学。E-mail:1364282438@qq.com
通信作者:谢元礼(1968—),男,湖南衡阳人,副教授,主要研究自然地理学和测绘学。E-mail:37911220@qq.com

更新日期/Last Update: 2020-08-25