scholarly journals Assessing the Accuracy of SRTM Dem and Aster Gdem Datasets for the Coastal Zone of Shandong Province, Eastern China

2015 ◽  
Vol 22 (s1) ◽  
pp. 15-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shaopeng Luana ◽  
Xiyong Hou ◽  
Yetang Wang
Keyword(s):  
Coastal Zone ◽  
Eastern China ◽  
Explanatory Power ◽  
Shandong Province ◽  
Ground Control ◽  
Line Graphs ◽  
Control Points ◽  
Srtm Dem ◽  
Aster Gdem ◽  
Ground Control Points

Abstract This study assessed the performance of recently released 3 arc second SRTM DEM version 4.1 by CSI-CGIAR and 1 arc second ASTER GDEM version 1 and version 2 by METI-NASA in comparison with ground control points from 1:50000 digital line graphs for the coastal zone of Shandong Province, Easter China. The vertical accuracy of SRTM DEM is 13.74 m root mean square error (RMSE), and GDEM version 1 reaches 24.11 m RMSE. Version 2 of ASTER GDEM shows better performance than version 1 and SRTM DEM with a RMSE of 12.12 m. A strong correlation of the magnitude of elevation error with slope and elevation is identified, with lager error magnitudes in the steeper slopes and higher elevations. Taking into account slope and elevation has the potential to considerably improve the accuracy of the SRTM DEM and GDEM version 1 products. However, this improvement for GDEM version 2 can be negligible due to their limited explanatory power for the DEM elevation errors.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF ASTER DEM, ASTER GDEM, AND SRTM DEM BASED ON GROUND-TRUTH GPS DATA

2015 ◽  
Vol 76 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Komeil Rokni ◽  
Anuar Ahmad ◽  
Sharifeh Hazini
Keyword(s):  
Ground Truth ◽  
Ground Control ◽  
Control Points ◽  
Pixel Size ◽  
Dual Frequency ◽  
Srtm Dem ◽  
Aster Gdem ◽  
Ground Control Points ◽  
Stereo Imagery ◽  
Aster Image

This study aims to compare the accuracies of ASTER DEM, ASTER GDEM, and SRTM DEM for the area of Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) and surrounding. In doing so, a number of Ground Control Points (GCPs) were collected using GPS technology and used to generate an absolute DEM using the ASTER stereo imagery. Moreover, two well-known DEMs including ASTER GDEM and SRTM DEM were obtained for the same area with ASTER image. Subsequently, several high accuracy ground-truth points were established around UTM using dual frequency GPS and used to assess the accuracies of the obtained DEMs. The results indicate that an elevation Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) of ±14.86m is achieved for the generated ASTER DEM, which is less than the 15m pixel size of ASTER image. The results further show that the elevation RMSEs of the ASTER GDEM and SRTM DEM are respectively ±4.52m and ±4.14m for the study area. The results illustrate although the resolution of SRTM DEM is much lower than ASTER GDEM, it could provide higher elevation accuracy. Finally, although the accuracy of the ASTER DEM in this study is not high in comparison with the accuracies of ASTER GDEM and SRTM DEM, based on the selected number of check points and resolution of ASTER image, it could be useful for various geoinformation applications.

scholarly journals EVALUATION OF ASTER GDEM V3 USING ICESAT LASER ALTIMETRY

2016 ◽  
Vol XLI-B4 ◽  
pp. 117-124
Author(s):  
C. C. Carabajal ◽  
J.-P. Boy
Keyword(s):  
Thermal Emission ◽  
Ground Control ◽  
Control Points ◽  
Ice Cloud ◽  
Aster Gdem ◽  
Ground Control Points ◽  
Digital Elevation ◽  
Elevation Model ◽  
Globally Distributed

We have used a set of Ground Control Points (GCPs) derived from altimetry measurements from the Ice, Cloud and land Elevation Satellite (ICESat) to evaluate the quality of the 30 m posting ASTER (Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer) Global Digital Elevation Model (GDEM) V3 elevation products produced by NASA/METI for Greenland and Antarctica. These data represent the highest quality globally distributed altimetry measurements that can be used for geodetic ground control, selected by applying rigorous editing criteria, useful at high latitudes, where other topographic control is scarce. Even if large outliers still remain in all ASTER GDEM V3 data for both, Greenland and Antarctica, they are significantly reduced when editing ASTER by number of scenes (N≥5) included in the elevation processing. For 667,354 GCPs in Greenland, differences show a mean of 13.74 m, a median of -6.37 m, with an RMSE of 109.65 m. For Antarctica, 6,976,703 GCPs show a mean of 0.41 m, with a median of -4.66 m, and a 54.85 m RMSE, displaying smaller means, similar medians, and less scatter than GDEM V2. Mean and median differences between ASTER and ICESat are lower than 10 m, and RMSEs lower than 10 m for Greenland, and 20 m for Antarctica when only 9 to 31 scenes are included.

scholarly journals Comparison of Digital Elevation Models for the designing water reservoirs: a case study Pskom water reservoir

2021 ◽  
Vol 264 ◽  
pp. 03058
Author(s):  
Khojiakbar Khasanov ◽  
Azamat Ahmedov
Keyword(s):  
Water Reservoir ◽  
Vertical Axis ◽  
Ground Control ◽  
Control Points ◽  
Alos Palsar ◽  
Aster Gdem ◽  
Ground Control Points ◽  
Digital Elevation ◽  
Vertical Accuracy

This study investigates the accuracy of various DEMs (SRTM DEM, ASTER GDEM, and ALOS PALSAR DEM) for the area of the designing Pskom water reservoir (recommended to construction in Pskom River, in Tashkent region. DEMs are compared for the study area using the Global Mapper application and selection Ground Control Points (GCP). The RMSE we calculate is the most easily interpreted statistic as the square root of the mean square error because it has the same units as the quantity drawn on the vertical axis. Results show that SRTM based measurements of ground control points (GCPs) exhibit RMSE of 15.72 m while ASTER DEM based measurements exhibits and RMSE of 18.47 m, ALOS PALSAR exhibit RMSE of 14.02 m for the Water reservoir located in the plain. There are AOS PALSAR outperforms SRTM and ASTER DEM in detecting vertical accuracy. Based on the capabilities of the Global Mapper program, we can build the longitudinal profile of the approximate location where the dam can be built in each DEM and compare. The results obtained show that the dam height is 187 m at ALOS PALSAR DEM, 168 m at ASTER GDEM, and 175 m at SRTM. The study found that using ALOS PALSAR data in the design of the proposed Pskom Reservoir for construction leads to a more accurate result. Comparing the DEMs data shows that there is more difference between the vertical accuracy; the horizontal accuracy level is almost the same. The results were obtained using ALOS PALSAR data in determining the storage volume (W=479368568 m3) and area (F=8.31 sq., km) of the water reservoir.

SRTM DEM-Aided Mapping Satellite-1 Image Geopositioning Without Ground Control Points

2017 ◽  
Vol 14 (11) ◽  
pp. 2137-2141 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaowei Chen ◽  
Baoming Zhang ◽  
Minyi Cen ◽  
Haitao Guo ◽  
Tonggang Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ground Control ◽  
Control Points ◽  
Srtm Dem ◽  
Ground Control Points

scholarly journals EVALUATION OF ASTER GDEM V3 USING ICESAT LASER ALTIMETRY

2016 ◽  
Vol XLI-B4 ◽  
pp. 117-124 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. C. Carabajal ◽  
J.-P. Boy
Keyword(s):  
Thermal Emission ◽  
Ground Control ◽  
Control Points ◽  
Ice Cloud ◽  
Aster Gdem ◽  
Ground Control Points ◽  
Digital Elevation ◽  
Elevation Model ◽  
Globally Distributed

We have used a set of Ground Control Points (GCPs) derived from altimetry measurements from the Ice, Cloud and land Elevation Satellite (ICESat) to evaluate the quality of the 30 m posting ASTER (Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer) Global Digital Elevation Model (GDEM) V3 elevation products produced by NASA/METI for Greenland and Antarctica. These data represent the highest quality globally distributed altimetry measurements that can be used for geodetic ground control, selected by applying rigorous editing criteria, useful at high latitudes, where other topographic control is scarce. Even if large outliers still remain in all ASTER GDEM V3 data for both, Greenland and Antarctica, they are significantly reduced when editing ASTER by number of scenes (N≥5) included in the elevation processing. For 667,354 GCPs in Greenland, differences show a mean of 13.74 m, a median of -6.37 m, with an RMSE of 109.65 m. For Antarctica, 6,976,703 GCPs show a mean of 0.41 m, with a median of -4.66 m, and a 54.85 m RMSE, displaying smaller means, similar medians, and less scatter than GDEM V2. Mean and median differences between ASTER and ICESat are lower than 10 m, and RMSEs lower than 10 m for Greenland, and 20 m for Antarctica when only 9 to 31 scenes are included.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document