Spatially-Explicit bayesian information entropy metrics for calibrating landscape transformation models

Entropy

Volumn 15, Issue 7, 2013, Pages 2480-2509

  Alexandridis, Kostas ^a   Pijanowski, Bryan ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS   (United States)

^b PURDUE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Artificial neural networks; Bayesian entropy; Bayesian information; Land use change; Maximum entropy

Indexed keywords

EID: 84881282418     PISSN: None     EISSN: 10994300     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3390/e15072480     Document Type: Article

References (72)

1. Lambin, E.F.; Geist, H. Land-Use and Land-Cover Change: Local Processes and Global Impacts; Springer-Verlag: Berlin, Germany, 2006.
2. Pijanowski, B.C.; Robinson, K.D. Rates and patterns of land use change in the upper Great Lakes States, USA: A framework for spatial temporal analysis. Landscape Urban Plan. 2011, 102, 102-116.
3. Committee on grand challenges in environmental sciences, oversight commission for the committee on grand challenges in environmental sciences. Grand Challenges in Environmental Sciences; The National Academies Press: Washington, D.C., USA, 2001.
4. Ray, D.K.; Pijanowksi, B.C.; Kendall, A.D.; Hyndman, D.W. Coupling land use and groundwater models to map land use legacies: Assessment of model uncertainties relevant to land use planning. Appl. Geogr. 2012, 34, 356-370.
5. Pijanowski, B.C.; Ray, D.K.; Kendall, A.D.; Duckles, J.M.; Hyndman, D.W. Using backcast land-use change and groundwater travel-time models to generate land-use legacy maps for watershed management. Ecol. Soc. 2007, 12, 25:1-25:19.
6. Yang, G.; Bowling, L.C.; Chherkauer, K.A.; Pijanowksi, B.C. The impact of urban development on hydrologic regime from catchment to basin scales. Landscape Urban Plan. 2011, 103, 237-247.
7. Mishra, V.; Cherkauer, K.A.; Niyogi, D.; Lei, M.; Pijanowski, B.C.; Ray, D.K.; Bowling, L.C.; Yang, G. A regional scale assessment of land use/land cover and climatic changes on water and energy cycle in the upper Midwest United States. Int. J. Climatol. 2010, 30, 2025-2044.
8. Pijanowski, B.; Moore, N.; Mauree, D.; Niyogi, D. Evaluating error propagation in coupled land-atmosphere models. Earth Interact. 2011, 15, 1-25.
9. Wiley, M.J.; et al. A multi-modeling approach to evaluating climate and land use change impacts in a Great Lakes River Basin. Hydrobiologia 2010, 657, 243-262.
10. Wayland, K.G.; Hyndman, D.W.; Boutt, D.; Pijanowski, B.C.; Long, D.T. Modeling the impact of historical land uses on surface water quality using ground water flow and solute transport models. Lakes Reserv. Res. Manag. 2002, 7, 189-199.
11. Pontius, R.G., Jr.; Boersma, W.; Castella, J.-C.; Clarke, K.; Nijs, T.D.; Dietzel, C.; Duan, Z.; Fostsing, E.; Goldstein, N.; Kok, K.; et al. Comparing the input, output, and validation maps for several models of land change. Ann. Reg. Sci. 2008, 42, 11-37.
12. Pontius, R.G., Jr.; Neeti, N. Uncertainty in the difference between maps of future land change scenarios. Sustain. Sci. 2010, 5, 39-50.
13. Pijanowski, B.C.; Pithadia, S.; Shellito, B.A.; Alexandridis, K. Calibrating a neural network-based urban change model for two metropolitan areas of the upper midwest of the United States. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 2005, 19, 197-215.
14. Pijanowski, B.C.; Alexandridis, K.T.; Müller, D. Modelling urbanization patterns in two diverse regions of the world. J. Land Use Sci. 2006, 1, 83-108.
15. Pontius, R.G., Jr.; Millones, M. Death to Kappa: Birth of quantity disagreement and allocation disagreement for accuracy assessment. Int. J. Remote Sens. 2011, 32, 4407-4429.
16. Shannon, C.E. A mathematical theory of communication. Bell Syst. Tech. J. 1948, 27, 379-423; Reprinted with corrections: 623-656, 1948.
17. Shannon, C.E.; Weaver, W. Mathematical Theory of Communication; University of Illinois Press: Chicago, IL, USA, 1963.
18. Jessop, A. Informed Assessments: An Introduction to Information, Entropy, and Statistics; Ellis Horwood: New York, NY, USA, 1995; p. 366.
19. Vajda, I. Theory of Statistical Inference and Information; Kluwer Academic Publishers: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1989; p. 432.
20. Stoica, P.; Selen, Y.; Li, J. Multi-model approach to model selection. Digit. Signal Process. 2004, 14, 399-412.
21. Nelson, T.; Boots, B.; Wulder, M.A. Techniques for accuracy assessment of tree locations extracted from remotely sensed imagery. J. Environ. Manag. 2005, 74, 265-271.
22. Roloff, G.J.; Haufler, J.B.; Scott, J.M.; Heglund, P.J.; Morrison, M.L.; Haufler, J.B.; Raphael, M.G.; Wall, W.A.; Samson, F.B. Modeling Habitat-based Viability from Organism to Population. In Predicting Species Occurences: Issues of Accuracy and Scale; Island Press: Washington, D.C., USA, 2002; pp. 673-686.
23. James, F.C.; McGulloch, C.E.; Scott, J.M.; Heglund, P.J.; Morrison, M.L.; Haufler, J.B.; Raphael, M.G.; Wall, W.A.; Samson, F.B. Predicting Species Presence and Abundance. In Predicting Species Occurences: Issues of Accuracy and Scale; Island Press: Washington, D.C., USA, 2002; pp. 461-466.
24. Gonzalez-Rebeles, C.; Thompson, B.C.; Bryant, F.C.; Scott, J.M.; Heglund, P.J.; Morrison, M.L.; Haufler, J.B.; Raphael, M.G.; Wall, W.A.; Samson, F.B. Influence of Selected Environmental Variables on GIS-Habitat Models Used for Gap Analysis. In Predicting Species Occurences: Issues of Accuracy and Scale; Island Press: Washington, D.C., USA, 2002; pp. 639-652.
25. Lowell, K.; Jaton, A. Spatial Accuracy Assessment: Land Information Uncertainty in Natural Resources; Ann Arbor Press: Chelsea, MI, USA, 1999; p. 455.
26. Cablk, M.; White, D.; Kiester, A.R.; Scott, J.M.; Heglund, P.J.; Morrison, M.L.; Haufler, J.B.; Raphael, M.G.; Wall, W.A.; Samson, F.B. Assessment of Spatial Autocorrelation in Empirical Models in Ecology. In Predicting Species Occurences: Issues of Accuracy and Scale; Island Press: Washington, D.C., USA, 2002; pp. 429-440.
27. Wu, J.; Hobbs, R. Key issues and research priorities in landscape ecology: An idiosyncratic synthesis. Landscape Ecol. 2002, 17, 355-365.
28. McKenney, D.W.; Venier, L.A.; Heerdegen, A.; McCarthy, M.A.; Scott, J.M.; Heglund, P.J.; Morrison, M.L.; Haufler, J.B.; Raphael, M.G.; Wall, W.A.; et al. A Monte Carlo experiment for species mapping problems. In Predicting Species Occurences: Issues of Accuracy and Scale; Island Press: Washington, D.C., USA, 2002; pp. 377-382.
29. Gelfand, A.E.; Schmidt, A.M.; Wu, S.; Silander, J.A.; Latimer, A.; Rebelo, A.G. Modelling species diversity through species level hierarchical modelling. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. C Appl. Stat. 2005, 54, 1-20.
30. Pontius, G.R., Jr.; Spencer, J. Uncertainty in extrapolations of predictive land-change models. Environ. Plan. B-Plan. Des. 2005, 32, 211-230.
31. Sun, H.; Forsythe, W.; Waters, N. Modeling urban land use change and urban sprawl: Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Netw. Spat. Econ. 2007, 7, 353-376.
32. Berry, B.J.L.; Kiel, L.D.; Elliot, E. Adaptive agents, intelligence, and emergent human organization: Capturing complexity through agent-based modeling. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2002, 99, 7178-7188.
33. North, M.; Macal, C.; Campbell, P. Oh behave! Agent-based behavioral representations in problem solving environments. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 2005, 21, 1192-1198.
34. Alexandridis, K.T.; Pijanowski, B.C. Assessing multiagent parcelization performance in the mabel simulation model using monte carlo replication experiments. Environ. Plan. B-Plan. Des. 2007, 34, 223-244.
35. Brown, D.G.; Page, S.E.; Riolo, R.; Zellner, M.; Rand, W. Path dependence and the validation of agent-based spatial models of land use. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 2005, 19, 153-174.
36. 36. Fortin, M.J.; Boots, B.; Csillag, F.; Remmel, T.K. On the role of spatial stochastic models in understanding landscape indices in ecology. Oikos 2003, 102, 203-212.
37. Demetrius, L.; Matthias Gundlach, V.; Ochs, G. Complexity and demographic stability in population models. Theor. Popul. Biol. 2004, 65, 211-225.
38. Luijten, J.C. A systematic method for generating land use patterns using stochastic rules and basic landscape characteristics: Results for a Colombian hillside watershed. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2003, 95, 427-441.
39. 39. Boyen, X.; Koller, D. Approximate Learning of Dynamic Models. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS 1998), Denver, Colorado, December 1998; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1999; pp. 396-402.
40. Dubra, J.; Ok, E.A. A model of procedural decision making in the presence of risk. Int. Econ. Rev. 2002, 43, 1053-1080.
41. Lazrak, A.; Quenez, M.C. A generalized stochastic differential utility. Math. Oper. Res. 2003, 28, 154-180.
42. Fokoue, E.; Titterington, D.M. Mixtures of factor analysers, bayesian estimation and inference by stochastic simulation. Mach. Learn. 2003, 50, 73-94.
43. Kleijnen, J.P.C. An overview of the design and analysis of simulation experiments for sensitivity analysis. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2005, 164, 287-300.
44. Aptekarev, A.I.; Dehesa, J.S.; Yanez, R.J. Spatial entropy of central potentials and strong asymptotics of orthogonal polynomials. J. Math. Phys. 1994, 35, 4423-4428.
45. Brink, A.D. Minimum spatial entropy threshold selection. IEEE Proc. Vis. Image Signal Process. 1995, 142, 128-132.
46. Batten, D.F. Complex landscapes of spatial interaction. Ann. Reg. Sci. 2001, 35, 81-111.
47. 47. Chen, K.; Irwin, E.; Jayaprakash, C.; Warren, K. The emergence of racial segregation in an agent-based model of residential location: The role of competing preferences. Comput. Math. Organ. Theory 2005, 11, 333-338.
48. Yin, L.; Brian, M. Residential location and the biophysical environment: Exurban development agents in a heterogeneous landscape. Environ. Plan. B-Plan. Des. 2007, 34, 279-295.
49. Munroe, D.K. Exploring the determinants of spatial pattern in residential land markets: amenities and disamenities in Charlotte, NC, USA. Environ. Plan. B-Plan. Des. 2007, 34, 336-354.
50. Carrion-Flores, C.; Irwin, E.G. Determinants of residential land-use conversion and sprawl at the rural-urban fringe. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 2004, 86, 889-904.
51. Parker, D.C.; Meretsky, V. Measuring pattern outcomes in an agent-based model of edge-effect externalities using spatial metrics. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2004, 101, 233-250.
52. Reginster, I.; Rounsevell, M. Scenarios of future urban land use in Europe. Environ. Plan. B-Plan. Des. 2006, 33, 619-636.
53. Veldkamp, A. Investigating land dynamics: Future research perspectives. J. Land Use Sci. 2009, 4, 5-14.
54. Pijanowski, B.C.; Shellito, B.; Pithadia, S.; Alexandridis, K. Forecasting and assessing the impact of urban sprawl in coastal watersheds along eastern Lake Michigan. Lakes Reser. Res. Manag. 2002, 7, 271-285.
55. Tayyebi, A.; Pekin, B.K.; Pijanowski, B.C.; Plourde, J.D.; Doucette, J.S.; Braun, D. Hierarchical modeling of urban growth across the conterminous USA: Developing meso-scale quantity drivers for the Land Transformation Model. J. Land Use Sci. 2012, 8, 1-21.
56. SEWRPC Digital Land Use Inventory; SouthEastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission (SEWRPC): Waukesha, WI, USA, 2000. Available http://maps.sewrpc.org/regionallandinfo/metadata/Land_Use_Inventory.htm (accessed on 24 June 2013)
57. Pijanowski, B.C.; Brown, D.G.; Shellito, B.A.; Manik, G.A. Using neural networks and GIS to forecast land use changes: A land transformation model. Comput. Environ. Urban Syst. 2002, 26, 553-575.
58. Foody, G.M. Status of land cover classification accuracy assessment. Remote Sens. Environ. 2002, 80, 185-201.
59. Sousa, S.; Caeiro, S.; Painho, M. Assessment of map similarity of categorical maps using kappa statistics: The case of sado estuary. In Proceedings of ESIG 2002, Tagus Park, Oeiras, Portugal, 17-19 July 2002; Associacao de Utilizadores de Informacao Geografica: Tagus Park, Oeiras, Portugal, 2002.
60. Brenner, H.; Gefeller, O. Variation of sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios and predictive values with disease prevalence. Stat. Med. 1997, 16, 981-991.
61. Suh, Y.T. Signal Detection in Noises of Unknown Powers Using Two-Input Receivers; University of Michigan: Ann Arbor, MI, USA, 1983; p. 153.
62. Glas, A.S.; Lijmer, J.G.; Prins, M.H.; Bonsel, G.J.; Bossuyt, P.M.M. The diagnostic odds ratio: A single indicator of test performance. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 2003, 56, 1129-1135.
63. Pepe, M.S.; Janes, H.; Longton, G.; Leisenring, W.; Newcomb, P. Limitations of the odds ratio in gauging the performance of a diagnostic, prognostic, or screening marker. Am. J. Epidemiol. 2004, 159, 882-890.
64. Schafer, J.; Strimmer, K. An empirical Bayes approach to inferring large-scale gene association networks. Bioinformatics 2005, 21, 754-764.
65. Smith, J.E.; Winkler, R.L.; Fryback, D.G. The first positive: Computing positive predictive value at the extremes. Ann. Intern. Med. 2000, 132, 804-809.
66. Hart, J.D.; Wehrly, T.E. Kernel regression estimation using repeated measurements data. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 1986, 81, 1080-1088.
67. Silverman, B.W. Density Estimation for Statistics and Data Analysis; CRC Press: London, UK, 1986; p. 175.
68. Simonoff, J.S. Smoothing methods in statistics; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 1996; p. 338.
69. Tapia, R.A.; Thompson, J.R. Nonparametric probability density estimation; Johns Hopkins University Press: Baltimore, MD, USA, 1978; p. 176
70. Wand, M.P.; Jones, M.C. Kernel Smoothing; Chapman and Hall: London, UK, 1995; p. 212.
71. Smyth, P. Probability density estimation and local basis function neural networks. In Computational Learning Theory and Natural Learning Systems; Hanson, S.J., Petsche, T., Rivest, R.L., Kearns, M., Eds.; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1994; Volume II, pp. 233-248.
72. Hansen, B.E. Sample splitting and threshold estimation. Econometrica 2000, 68, 575-603.