Bathymetry of Cannikin Lake, Amchitka Island, Alaska, with

The middle part of the lake also lacks some of the local details
but the main featurea are present. The Calcomp GPCP program has not
. completely iaolated the actual mounds end depreeaionm but has characterized r
them a. knolls or fingers. isolation of theae mound8 could probably be
effected by slightly decreasing the grid nize. The deeper parts of the
lake conform well to the manually-drawn version.
The northeast part of the lake show the poorest correlation, because
of the omission of a depreanion and a weak impression of the uppermost mound.
In this region, where there i m rapid chunge In altitude, the poor correlation
may be due to inadequate shoreline control. This tende to centralize the
deeper areas rather than offnet them as in the manually-drawn map.
As a whole, the cornparibon is good and gives a good repreeentation of
the main features shown in the manually-drawn map. Some of the local
features omitted on the map produced using the Calcomp GPCP program could
be brought out by decreaming the grid size; hawever, too small a grid size
will tend to break up the long linerr featurea shown which correlate well
with the name features on the manually-drawn map.
The map produced using the Calcomp GPCP program compared more favorably
with the manually-drawn map than did the mrp produced using the WET program.
The map produced using the Calcomp GPCP program permitted recognition of
smaller features withour breaking up the long linear features when using
the same grid size for both programs.
14
US. D.O.L.
D ~ I N TECHN~CAL V
INFOF~T~AYION
~ R ( X . G E ~
P'
L
.
.F