ALPMON FINAL REPORT - ARC systems research

Contract ENV4-CT96-0359 ALPMON
Annex 6: Number and Accuracy of Parameters - Customer Requirements vs. ALPMON Results
Tarvisio test site (ALU) – Tourism and Forestry:
1:50,000-1:100,000 1:25,000 (national customers) Comment
Requirement ALPMON Requirement ALPMON Conventional methods
Forest / non forest could be classified - - - -
coniferous, deciduous and mixed could be
classified;
tree species could not be classified
Forest type could be classified coniferous
deciduous
mixed;
single tree species
more classes were classified customer agreed
Forest age could be classified Forest age
< 30, > 30 years
customer agreed
the classes
< 30 %, 30 - 60, > 60% could be classified
Crown closure could be classified Crown closure
< 50, 50 - 80, > 80%
Rock / gravel / soil could be classified Rock / gravel could be classified as one class, but not be
separated
Sealed surfaces could not be classified streets could not be classified have been digitised sealed surface showed the same signature
as rock/gravel
settlements could not be classified have been digitised sealed surface showed the same signature
as rock/gravel
Swamp Swamp only one small area in the test site
Water lakes could be classified
creeks, rivers could not be classified rivers have been digitised
Meadow / pasture Meadow / pasture could be digitised
Rhododendron sp. /
shrubs and low growing could be classified
Juniperus sp.
trees;
(could be classified,
could not be classified)
(subclasses:
in mountains,
next to rivers)
technical lines could not be classified
All classes mentioned above except Pinus mugo could be classified good with accuracies between 70 an 95 percent. But the Kappa-coefficient which indicates
the strength of the classification is very low (as can be seen in the report on WP10). Due to the topography of the test site there was a big amount of shadowed
areas, where classification was not possible (see report on WP9).
JR, RSDE, ALU, LMU, Seibersdorf, WSL 113