Partial validation of cellular automata based model simulations of urban growth: An approach to assessing factor influence using spatial methods

Environmental Modelling and Software

Volumn 69, Issue , 2015, Pages 77-89

  Barreira González, Pablo ^a   Aguilera Benavente, Francisco ^a   Gómez Delgado, Montserrat ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALCALÁ   (Spain)

Author keywords

Cellular automata models; Frequency maps; Map comparison; Partial validation; Urban growth

Indexed keywords

CELLULAR AUTOMATA; LAND USE; MOBILE SECURITY; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS;

AUTOMATA-BASED MODEL; CELLULAR AUTOMATA MODELS; FREQUENCY MAP; GLOBAL SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; MAP COMPARISON; PARTIAL VALIDATION; SPATIAL PATTERNS; SPATIAL VARIABILITY;

URBAN GROWTH;

AUTOMATION; FUTURE PROSPECT; LAND USE CHANGE; MODEL VALIDATION; SPATIAL ANALYSIS; URBAN GROWTH;

MADRID [SPAIN]; SPAIN;

EID: 84925970858     PISSN: 13648152     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.envsoft.2015.03.008     Document Type: Article

References (90)

1. Aguilera F., Talavera R. Valoración de escenarios futuros a través de la conectividad del paisaje. Obs. Medioambient. 2009, 12:17-36.
2. Aguilera F., Valenzuela L.M., Bosque J. Simulación de escenarios futuros en la aglomeración urbana de granada a través de modelos basados en autómatas celulares. Bol. De. La Asoc. De. Geogr. Esp. 2010, 54:271.
3. Aguilera F., Valenzuela L.M., Botequilha-Leitao A. Landscape metrics in the analysis of urban land use patterns: a case study in a Spanish metropolitan area. Landsc. Urban Plan 2011, 99(3-4):226-238.
4. Aguilera F., Botequilha-Leitão A., Díaz-Varela E. Detecting multi-scale urban growth patterns and processes in the Algarve region (Southern Portugal). Appl. Geogr. 2014, 53:234-245.
5. Barredo J.I., Kasanko M., McCormick N., Lavalle C. Modelling dynamic spatial processes: simulation or urban future scenarios through cellular automata. Landsc. Urban Plan 2003, 64(3):145-160.
6. Barredo J.I., Demichelli L., Lavalle C., Kasanko M., McCormick N. Modelling future urban scenarios in developing countries: an application case study in Lagos, Nigeria. Environ. Plan. B Plan. Des 2004, 31(1):65-84.
7. Batty M. Cities and Complexity: Understanding Cities with Cellular Automata, Agent-based Models, and Fractals 2007, The MIT Press.
8. Batty M., Xie Y. Possible urban automata. Environ. Plan. B Plan. Des 1997, 24:175-192.
9. Benenson I., Torrens P.M. Geosimulation: Automata-based Modelling of Urban Phenomena 2004, John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ.
10. Berdoulay V. The history of geography and the challenge of strategic foresight. Bol. De. La Asoc. De. Geogr. Esp. 2009, 51:9-23.
11. Berling-Wolff S., Wu J. Modeling urban landscape dynamics: a case study in Phoenix, USA. Urban Ecosyst. 2004, 7(3):215-240.
12. Börjeson L., Höjer M., Dreborg K.-H., Ekvall T., Finnveden G. Scenario types and techniques: towards a user's guide. Futures 2006, 38(7):723-739.
13. Brown D.G., Page S., 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(2):153-174.
14. Burriel E.L. Subversion of land-use plans and the housing bubble in Spain. Urban Res. Pract. 2011, 4(3):232-249.
15. Buyantuyev A., Wu J. Urbanization alters spatiotemporal patterns of ecosystem primary production: a case study of the Phoenix metropolitan region, USA. J.Arid Environ. 2009, 73(4):512-520.
16. Buyantuyev A., Wu J. Urban heat islands and landscape heterogeneity: linking spatiotemporal variations in surface temperatures to land-cover and socioeconomic patterns. Landsc. Ecol. 2010, 25(1):17-33.
17. Buyantuyev A., Wu J.G., Gries C. Multiscale analysis of the urbanization pattern of the Phoenix metropolitan landscape of USA: time, space and thematic resolution. Landsc. Urban Plan 2010, 94(3-4):206-217.
18. Canters F., De Genst W., Dufourmont H. Assessing effects of input uncertainty in structural landscape classification. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 2002, 16(2):129-149.
19. Chen Y., Yu J., Khan S. Spatial sensitivity analysis of multi-criteria weights in GIS-based land suitability evaluation. Environ. Model. & Softw. 2010, 25(12):1582-1591.
20. Chen Y., Yu J., Khan S. The spatial framework for weight sensitivity analysis in AHP-based multi-criteria decision making. Environ. Model. & Softw. 2013, 48:129-140.
21. Cheng J., Masser I. Urban growth pattern modeling: a case study of Wuhan city, PR China. Lands. Urban Plan 2003, 62(4):199-217.
22. Chu-Agor M., Muñoz-Carpena R., Kiker G., Emanuelsson A., Linkov I. Exploring vulnerability of coastal habitats to sea level rise through global sensitivity and uncertainty analyses. Environ. Model. & Softw. 2011, 26(5):593-604.
23. Couclelis H. From cellular automata to urban models: new principles for model development and implementation. Environ. Plan. B Plan. Des 1997, 24:165-174.
24. Couclelis H. Where has the future gone? Rethinking the role of integrated land-use models in spatial planning. Environ. Plan. A Environ. Plan 2005, 37(8):1353-1371.
25. Crosetto M., Tarantola S. Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis: tools for GIS-based model implementation. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 2001, 15(5):415-437.
26. Crosetto M., Moreno Ruiz J.A., Crippa B. Uncertainty propagation in models driven by remotely sensed data. Remote Sens. Environ. 2001, 76(3):373-385.
27. Dietzel C., Clarke K.C. Spatial differences in multi-resolution urban automata modeling. Trans.. GIS 2004, 8(4):479-492.
28. Dietzel C., Herold M., Hemphill J.J., Clarke K.C. Spatio-temporal dynamics in California's central valley: empirical links to urban theory. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 2005, 19(2):175-195.
29. Eastman R. IDRISI Andes Version 15 2006, Clark Labs, Clark University, Worcester, USA. http://www.clarklabs.org.
30. Engelen G., White R. Validating and Calibrating Integrated Cellular Automata Based Models of Land Use Change 2008, 185-211. The Dynamics of Complex Urban Systems, Springer.
31. European Environment Agency Land Accounts for Europe 1990-2000: towards Integrated Land and Ecosystem Accounting 2006, European Environment Agency, Copenhagen.
32. Forman R.T. Land Mosaics: the Ecology of Landscapes and Regions 1995, Cambridge University Press.
33. Frankhauser P. Fractal geometry of urban patterns and their morphogenesis. Discret. Dyn. Nat. Soc. 1998, 2(2):127-145.
34. Garcia A.M., Sante I., Crecente R., Miranda D. An analysis of the effect of the stochastic component of urban cellular automata models. Comput. Environ. Urban Syst. 2011, 35(4):289-296.
35. Gómez M., Bosque J. Sensitivity analysis in multicriteria spatial decision-making: a review. Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess 2004, 10(6):1173-1187.
36. Gómez-Delgado M., Rodríguez-Espinosa V.M. Análisis de la dinámica urbana y simulación de escenarios de desarrollo futuro con tecnologías de la información geográfica 2012, 352. RA-MA EDITORIAL.
37. Gómez-Delgado M., Tarantola S. GLOBAL sensitivity analysis, GIS and multi-criteria evaluation for a sustainable planning of a hazardous waste disposal site in Spain. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 2006, 20(4):449-466.
38. Goodchild M.F., Hunter G.J. Asimple positional accuracy measure for linear features. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. Sci. 1997, 11(3):299-306.
39. Grimm N.B., Faeth S.H., Golubiewski N.E., Redman C.L., Wu J., Bai X., Briggs J.M. Global change and the ecology of cities. Science 2008, 319(5864):756-760.
40. Hagen A. Fuzzy set approach to assessing similarity of categorical maps. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 2003, 17(3):235-249.
41. Hagen A. Map comparison methods that simultaneously address overlap and structure. J.Geogr. Syst. 2006, 8(2):165-185.
42. Hansen H.S. Modelling the future coastal zone urban development as implied by the IPCC SRES and assessing the impact from sea level rise. Landsc. Urban Plan 2010, 98(3):141-149.
43. Hepinstall-Cymerman J., Coe S., Hutyra L.R. Urban growth patterns and growth management boundaries in the Central Puget Sound, Washington, 1986-2007. Urban Ecosyst. 2013, 16(1):109-129.
44. Herold M., Goldstein N.C., Clarke K.C. The spatiotemporal form of urban growth: measurement, analysis and modelling. Remote Sens. Environ 2003, 86(3):286-302.
45. Herold M., Couclelis H., Clarke K.C. The role of spatial metrics in the analysis and modeling of urban land use change. Comput. Environ. Urban Syst. 2005, 29(4):369-399.
46. Hewitt R., Van Delden H., Escobar F. Participatory land use modelling, pathways to an integrated approach. Environ. Model. Softw. 2014, 52:149-165.
47. Itami R.M. Simulating spatial dynamics: cellular automata theory. Landsc. Urban Plan 1994, 30:27-47.
48. Jantz C.A., Goetz S.J. Analysis of scale dependencies in an urban land-use-change model. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 2005, 19(2):217-241.
49. Kasanko M., Barredo Cano J.I., Lavalle C., McCormick N., Demichelli L., Sagris V., Brezger A. Are European cities becoming dispersed? A comparative analysis of 15 european urban areas. Landsc. Urban Plan 2006, 77(1-2):111-130.
50. Kaza N. The changing urban landscape of the continental United States. Landsc. Urban Plan 2013, 110:74-86.
51. Kocabas V., Dragicevic S. Assessing cellular automata model behaviour using a sensitivity analysis approach. Comput. Environ.t Urban Syst. 2006, 30(6):921-953.
52. Li X., Yang Q.S., Liu X.P. Discovering and evaluating urban signatures for simulating compact development using cellular automata. Landsc. Urban Plan 2008, 86(2):177-186.
53. Ligmann-Zielinska A., Jankowski P. Spatially-explicit integrated uncertainty and sensitivity analysis of criteria weights in multicriteria land suitability evaluation. Environ. Model. Softw. 2014, 57:235-247.
54. Ligmann-Zielinska A., Sun L. Applying time-dependent variance-based global sensitivity analysis to represent the dynamics of an agent-based model of land use change. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 2010, 24(12):1829-1850.
55. Lilburne L., Tarantola S. Sensitivity analysis of spatial models. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 2009, 23(2):151-168.
56. Liu X.H., Andersson C. Assessing the impact of temporal dynamics on land-use change modeling. Comput. Environ. Urban Syst. 2004, 28(1-2):107-124.
57. Lowry J.H., Miller H.J., Hepner G.F. Agis-based sensitivity analysis of community vulnerability to hazardous contaminants on the Mexico/Us border. Photogramm. Eng. Remote Sens. 1995, 61(11):1347-1359.
58. Marrel A., Iooss B., Jullien M., Laurent B., Volkova E. Global sensitivity analysis for models with spatially dependent outputs. Environmetrics 2011, 22(3):383-397.
59. Mas J.F., Perez-Vega A., Clarke K.C. Assessing simulated land use/cover maps using similarity and fragmentation indices. Ecol. Complex 2012, 11:38-45.
60. McGarigal K., Cushman S., Neel M., Ene E. FRAGSTATS: Spatial Pattern Analysis Program for Categorical Maps 2002, (Computer software program produced by the authors at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst).
61. Ménard A., Marceau D.J. Exploration of spatial scale sensitivity in geographic cellular automata. Environ. Plan. B Plan. Des 2005, 32(5):693-714.
62. Mitsova D., Shuster W., Wang X.H. Acellular automata model of land cover change to integrate urban growth with open space conservation. Landsc. Urban Plan 2011, 99(2):141-153.
63. OSE, O.d.l.S.e.E. Cambios de ocupación del suelo en España. Implicaciones para la sostenibilidad 2006, Estudio realizado a partir del proyecto CORINE LAND COVER, Mundi-Prensa Libros, Madrid.
64. Paegelow M., Olmedo M.T.C. Modelling Environmental Dynamics 2008, Springer.
65. Pan Y., Roth A., Yu Z., Doluschitz R. The impact of variation in scale on the behavior of a cellular automata used for land use change modeling. Comput. Environ. Urban Syst. 2010, 34(5):400-408.
66. Petrov L.O., Lavalle C., Kasanko M. Urban land use scenarios for a tourist region in Europe: applying the MOLAND model to Algarve, Portugal. Landsc. Urban Plan 2009, 92(1):10-23.
67. Plata W., Gómez M., Bosque J. Desarrollo de modelos de crecimiento urbano óptimo para la Comunidad de Madrid aplicando Métodos de Evaluación Multicriterio y Sistemas de Información Geográfica. GeoFocus 2010, 10:103-134.
68. Plata-Rocha W., Gomez-Delgado M., Bosque-Sendra J. Simulating urban growth scenarios using GIS and multicriteria analysis techniques: a case study of the Madrid region, Spain. Environ. Plan. B Plan. Des 2011, 38(6):1012-1031.
69. Plata-Rocha W., Gómez-Delgado M., Bosque-Sendra J. Proposal for the introduction of the spatial Perspective in the application of global sensitivity analysis. J.Geogr. Inf. Syst 2012, 4:503-513.
70. Pontius R.G. Statistical methods to partition effects of quantity and location during comparison of categorical maps at multiple resolutions. Photogramm. Eng. Remote Sens 2002, 68(10):1041-1050.
71. Pontius R.G., Millones M. Death to Kappa: birth of quantity disagreement and allocation disagreement for accuracy assessment. Int. J. Remote Sens 2011, 32(15):4407-4429.
72. Power C., Simms A., White R. Hierarchical fuzzy pattern matching for the regional comparison of land use maps. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 2001, 15(1):77-100.
73. Saltelli A., Chan K., Scott E.M. Sensitivity Analysis 2000, Wiley, New York.
74. Samat N. Characterizing the scale sensitivity of the cellular automata simulated urban growth: a case study of Seberan Perai Region, Penang State, Malaysia. Comput.,Environ. Urban Syst. 2006, 30(6):905-920.
75. Sante I., Garcia A.M., Miranda D., Crecente R. Cellular automata models for the simulation of real-world urban processes: a review and analysis. Landsc. Urban Plan 2010, 96(2):108-122.
76. Schwarz N. Urban form revisited-selecting indicators for characterising European cities. Landsc. Urban Plan 2010, 96(1):29-47.
77. Seto K.C., Fragkias M. Quantifying spatiotemporal patterns of urban land-use change in four cities of China with time series landscape metrics. Landsc. Ecol. 2005, 20(7):871-888.
78. Sobol' I.M. Global sensitivity indices for nonlinear mathematical models and their Monte Carlo estimates. Math.. Comput. Simul. 2001, 55(1-3):271-280.
79. Store R., Kangas J. Integrating spatial multi-criteria evaluation and expert knowledge for GIS-based habitat suitability modelling. Landsc. Urban Plan 2001, 55(2):79-93.
80. Torrens P. How Cellular Models of Urban Systems Work, CASA Working Serie Papers 2000, Centre for Advanced Spatial Analysis, University College London.
81. Triantakonstantis D., Mountrakis G. Urban growth prediction: a review of computational models and human perceptions. J.Geogr. Inf. Syst. 2012, 4(6):555-587.
82. Tveite H., Langaas S. An accuracy assessment method for geographical line data sets based on buffering. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 1999, 13(1):27-47.
83. van Vliet J., Bregt A.K., Hagen-Zanker A. Revisiting Kappa to account for change in the accuracy assessment of land-use change models. Ecol. Model 2011, 222(8):1367-1375.
84. Veregin H. Data quality parameters. Geogr. Inf. Syst. 1999, 177-189. P.A. Longley, M.F. Goodchild, D.J. Mcaguire, D.W. Rhind (Eds.).
85. Visser H., de Nijs T. The map comparison kit. Environ. Model. Softw. 2006, 21(3):346-358.
86. White R., Engelen G. Cellular-automata and fractal urban form - a cellular modeling approach to the evolution of urban land-use patterns. Environ. Plan. A 1993, 25(8):1175-1199.
87. White R., Engelen G. Cellular automata as the basis of integrated dynamic regional modelling. Environ. Plan. B Plan. Des 1997, 24(2):235-246.
88. White R., Engelen G., Uljee I. The use of constrained cellular automata for high-resolution modelling of urban land-use dynamics. Environ. Plan. B: Plan. Des 1997, 24(3):323-343.
89. Wu J., Jenerette G.D., Buyantuyev A., Redman C.L. Quantifying spatiotemporal patterns of urbanization: the case of the two fastest growing metropolitan regions in the United States. Ecol. Complex. 2011, 8(1):1-8.
90. Yeh A.G.-O., Li X. Errors and uncertainties in urban cellular automata. Computers. Environ. Urban Syst. 2006, 30:10-28.