基于机载LiDAR的高寒山区遥感高程数据精度评估

遥感高程数据是获取缺资料地区DEM（Digital elevation models）数据的重要手段。然而,由于高寒山区实地高程测量稀少,难以对多源遥感DEM数据进行统一验证。ICESat-2等新的遥感高程数据在高寒山区也缺乏相应的精度评估。针对此问题,以青藏高原东北缘的冰沟流域作为研究区,采用机载航空遥感获取的大范围LiDAR（Light Detection And Ranging）DEM数据对新产品ICESat-2 ATL06（Ice, Cloud, and Land Elevation Satellite-2, Land Ice Height）、ALOS DEM（12.5 m分辨率）以及新版本SRTM V3（SRTM Arc-Second Global 1 V003）、ASTER GDEM V3（ASTER Global DEM）进行验证,并分析地形因子与均方根误差RMSE的关系。研究结果表明：ICESat-2 ATL06数据在高寒山区的RMSE为0.747 m。由于其较高的精度,可用于验证缺资料地区的其他遥感高程数据。其他遥感高程数据的精度都相对较低,ALOS 12.5 m数据的RMSE为5.284 m;ASTER GDEM V3版本的RMSE为9.903 m。实验所采用的4种遥感高程数据与机载LiDAR DEM均具有较高的相关性,相关系数在0.998与1.000之间。实验还揭示了坡度是影响遥感DEM精度的主要因素。除ICESat-2 ATL06外,其他高程数据的RMSE均随坡度的增大先减小再增大,且都存在一个最佳坡度值。鉴于地形复杂多样的冰沟流域具有青藏高原高寒山区的典型特征,多源遥感DEM数据在该区域的验证结论具有较好的代表性,可为相似地区DEM数据的使用和评估提供重要的知识补充。     

低山丘陵区多源数字高程模型误差分析

作为多学科交叉与渗透产物的数字高程模型(DEM)已在诸多学科和领域及实际应用中发挥了重要作用,但目前能够免费获取的高分辨全球DEM在不同区域仍存在很大的不确定性,应用之前进行质量评估至关重要。以烟台市为实验区,以大比例尺地形图(1∶10 000)生成的DEM为参照,结合坡度、坡向和土地覆被类型等地学因子,定量分析了目前广泛应用的两个版本ASTER GDEM(先进星载热辐射和反射辐射计全球数字高程模型)ASTETR 1和ASTER 2及不同空间分辨率SRTM DEM(航天飞机雷达地形测绘任务)(SRTM 1:～30m和SRTM 3:～90m)在低山丘陵区高程、坡度及坡向误差。结果表明:在研究区域内,ASTER 1、ASTER 2、SRTM 3、SRTM 1总体高程均方根误差分别为8.7m、6.3m、3.7m和2.9m。ASTER与SRTM的高程精度不同程度地受坡度、坡向以及土地覆被类型等地学因子的影响,DEM误差随坡度增加而增大,其中SRTM 3精度对该因子最敏感。尽管坡向对DEM精度影响不明显(4种DEM在不同坡向上的均方根误差波动范围均不超过2m),但是不同土地覆被类型下这4种DEM精度差异显著。此外,分析4种DEM提取的坡度可知,SRTM 1的均方根坡度误差最低(2.5°)、ASTER 1与ASTER 2的坡度的均方根误差大致相同(3.6°、3.9°)、SRTM 3的坡度均方根误差最高(4.3°)。坡向的精度SRTM 1最高,ASTER 1与ASTER 2次之,SRTM 3最低。研究结果对我国低山丘陵区ASTER GDEM与SRTM DEM的应用与精度评估具有一定的借鉴作用。     

低山丘陵区多源数字高程模型误差分析北大核心CSCD

作为多学科交叉与渗透产物的数字高程模型(DEM)已在诸多学科和领域及实际应用中发挥了重要作用,但目前能够免费获取的高分辨全球DEM在不同区域仍存在很大的不确定性,应用之前进行质量评估至关重要。以烟台市为实验区,以大比例尺地形图(1∶10 000)生成的DEM为参照,结合坡度、坡向和土地覆被类型等地学因子,定量分析了目前广泛应用的两个版本ASTER GDEM(先进星载热辐射和反射辐射计全球数字高程模型)ASTETR 1和ASTER 2及不同空间分辨率SRTM DEM(航天飞机雷达地形测绘任务)(SRTM 1:～30m和SRTM 3:～90m)在低山丘陵区高程、坡度及坡向误差。结果表明:在研究区域内,ASTER 1、ASTER 2、SRTM 3、SRTM 1总体高程均方根误差分别为8.7m、6.3m、3.7m和2.9m。ASTER与SRTM的高程精度不同程度地受坡度、坡向以及土地覆被类型等地学因子的影响,DEM误差随坡度增加而增大,其中SRTM 3精度对该因子最敏感。尽管坡向对DEM精度影响不明显(4种DEM在不同坡向上的均方根误差波动范围均不超过2m),但是不同土地覆被类型下这4种DEM精度差异显著。此外,分析4种DEM提取的坡度可知,SRTM 1的均方根坡度误差最低(2.5°)、ASTER 1与ASTER 2的坡度的均方根误差大致相同(3.6°、3.9°)、SRTM 3的坡度均方根误差最高(4.3°)。坡向的精度SRTM 1最高,ASTER 1与ASTER 2次之,SRTM 3最低。研究结果对我国低山丘陵区ASTER GDEM与SRTM DEM的应用与精度评估具有一定的借鉴作用。     

多基线InSAR技术的震区DEM提取及精度分析

针对汶川特大地震发生后的震区地形严重破坏，原有的地形图及DEM数据不再具有时效性，不能准确地描述地质特征，亟待更新重建。收集了2007年8月至2010年7月的20景Envisat ASAR影像数据，采用多基线InSAR技术对研究区域DEM进行提取，并对生成的ASAR DEM与ASTER GDEM和SRTM DEM进行了比较分析。实验结果表明，由于时效性原因，ASTER GDEM和SRTM DEM不能较好反映震后地面高程变化情况；所提取的ASAR DEM能有效弥补震后灾区DEM不足，在一些植被较少和地质稳定区域，ASAR DEM有着较高的精度，多基线InSAR技术提取方法为震后形变区域DEM提取提供了一个很好的途径。     

多源外部DEM对两轨DINSAR测量结果影响分析

在总结两轨差分中参考DEM影响的最新研究成果基础上,以青藏高原上典型平地和山地作为研究区,利用理论上没有形变的ERS Tandem像对以及3种常用外部参考DEM(SRTM,ASTER GDEM,1:5万DEM),使用ROI_PAC软件进行两轨差分干涉试验.实例证明:SRTM更适合作为两轨差分中的外部参考DEM,并对此试验结果予以解释分析,即多源DEM数据质量的差异导致干涉图与DEM配准精度的不同,并最终反映在差分干涉相位误差中.本文研究结论对提高DInSAR处理精度有参考价值.     

多源外部DEM对两轨DINSAR测量结果影响分析

在总结两轨差分中参考DEM影响的最新研究成果基础上,以青藏高原上典型平地和山地作为研究区,利用理论上没有形变的ERS Tandem像对以及3种常用外部参考DEM（SRTM,ASTER GDEM,1∶5万DEM）,使用ROI_PAC软件进行两轨差分干涉试验。实例证明：SRTM更适合作为两轨差分中的外部参考DEM,并对此试验结果予以解释分析,即多源DEM数据质量的差异导致干涉图与DEM配准精度的不同,并最终反映在差分干涉相位误差中。本文研究结论对提高DInSAR处理精度有参考价值。     

基于ASTER遥感立体像对的DEM提取

卫星遥感立体像对提取DEM是地貌信息获取的一个重要里程碑,ASTER卫星传感器是可以拍摄立体像对传感器中的代表,具有数据质量稳定、覆盖广泛、价格低廉的特点。本文通过实例研究了ASTER立体像对在高山峡谷地区提取DEM的精度。首先简述ASTER的立体像对提取DEM的国内外发展现状,然后针对一处高程变化显著地区在1:10万比例尺地形图采集地面控制点(GCP),用1:5万精度的DEM作检验,获得GCP范围内高程误差为±20.4m,GCP范围外高程误差为±48.2m,平均误差是±34.3m。这证明可以在小区域内选取GCP控制点,由ASTER立体像大范围外推生成大范围DEM,而且采用常规的技术手段和普通的商业软件就可实现。该方法提取DEM对于我国地形资料缺乏的西部地区有很强的实用性。     

应用ASTER 数据提取高程和树种信息的研究

给出了一种针对ASTER 数据, 在提取森林资源三维分布方面的技术方法。该方法探讨了ASTER 数据的解读, 立体像对的提取、视差影像的生成模型和相对数字高程模型(DEM ) 的生成、最后三维立体景观模型的恢复。分析探讨从14 个波段中合成不同光谱分辨率数据以准确识别主要树种信息的可能和依据, 对立体视觉技术在林业上立体景观模型的搭建, 特别是主要树种分布的概况, 进行了理论和方法初步探讨。实验结果证明使用该技术路线能有效地搭建研究区域的三维立体景观模型。     

ASTER GDEM数据介绍与程序读取

2009年6月30日,期待已久的ASTER GDEM数据由日本经济产业省(METI)和美国航天局(NASA)共同发布,其空间分辨率达到了1弧秒×1弧秒(约30m×30m),相比2003年NASA发布的SRTM数据有了很大的提高,并且其陆地表面覆盖率也大幅提高,达到了陆地面积的99%。本文介绍了ASTER GDEM的相关特性以及使用程序读取该数据的方法。     

基于地形信息的Landsat与Radarsat-2遥感数据协同分类研究

针对不同成像机理的光学与雷达遥感数据协同应用于地表信息提取瓶颈问题,提出了一种基于地形信息的光学与雷达数据协同分类方法。首先利用InSAR测量技术从Radarsat-2数据中提取DEM地形信息,然后构建基于地形信息的Landsat光学数据和Radarsat-2雷达数据的不同特征集输入模型,最后通过随机样本选取构建随机森林(Random Forest,RF)、支持向量机(Support Vector Machine,SVM)和决策树(Decision Tree,DT)分类算法模型提取地表信息。结果表明:①针对不同特征协同策略,在随机选取10%训练样本时,Radarsat-2干涉提取DEM与Landsat数据集提取精度优于ASTER GDEM与光学影像协同策略;②针对不同地表信息提取算法模型,通过50次随机选取训练样本构建模型评价分类精度,验证RF算法的鲁棒性和提取精度都要优于DT算法和SVM算法。研究充分利用光学和雷达遥感的优势信息,为光学和雷达遥感协同地表信息提取提供新的思路。     

Accuracy assessment of the ASTER GDEM and SRTM3 DEM: an example in the Loess Plateau and North China Plain of China

The digital elevation model (DEM) produced by the Shuttle Radar Topographic Mission (SRTM) has provided important fundamental data for topographic analysis in many fields. The recently released global digital elevation model (GDEM) produced by the Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer (ASTER) has higher spatial resolution and wider coverage than the SRTM3 DEM, and thus may be of more value to researchers. Taking two typical study areas—the Loess Plateau and the North China Plain of China—as an example, this article assesses the accuracy of the SRTM3 DEM and ASTER GDEM by collecting ground control points from topographical maps. It is found that both the SRTM3 DEM and the ASTER GDEM are far more accurate for the North China Plain than for the Loess Plateau. For the Loess Plateau, the accuracy of the ASTER GDEM is similar to that of the SRTM3 DEM; whereas for the North China Plain, it is much worse than that of the SRTM3 DEM. Considering the negative bias of the ASTER GDEM for flat or gentle regions, we improve its accuracy by adding the difference of the mean value between the SRTM3 DEM and ASTER GDEM for the North China Plain; then, the root mean square error (RMSE) of ±7.95 m from the original ASTER GDEM is improved to ±5.26 m, which demonstrates that it is a simple but useful way to improve the accuracy of the ASTER GDEM in flat or gentle regions.     

Evaluation of ASTER GDEM using GPS benchmarks and SRTM in China

The Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer (ASTER) Global Digital Elevation Model (GDEM) has generated one of the most complete high-resolution digital topographic data sets of the world to date. The ASTER GDEM covers land surfaces between 83° N and 83° S at a spatial resolution of 1 arc-second (approximately 30 m at the equator). As an improvement over Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM) coverage, the ASTER GDEM will be a very useful product for many applications, such as relief analysis, hydrological studies, and radar interferometry. In this article, its absolute vertical accuracy in China was assessed at five study sites using ground control points (GCPs) from high-accuracy GPS benchmarks and also using a DEM-to-DEM comparison with the Consultative Group on International Agriculture Research Consortium for Spatial Information (CGIAR-CSI) SRTM DEM Version 4.1. It is demonstrated that the vertical accuracy of ASTER GDEM is 26 m (root mean square error (RMSE)) against GPS-GCPs, while for the SRTM DEM it is 23 m. Furthermore, height differences in the GDEM-SRTM comparison appear to be overestimated in the areas with a south or southwest aspect in the five study areas. To a certain extent, the error can be attributed to variations in heights due to land-cover effects and undefined inland waterbodies. But the ASTER GDEM needs further error-mitigating improvements to meet the expected accuracy specification. However, as for its unprecedented detail, it is believed that the ASTER GDEM offers a major alternative in accessibility to high-quality elevation data.     

Vertical accuracy assessment of global digital elevation models and validation of gravity database heights in Niger

In this study, we assessed the vertical accuracy of ASTER GDEM (Advanced Space-borne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer – Global Digital Elevation Model) version 2, AW3D30 (ALOS World 3D – 30m) and the 1 and 3 arc-seconds versions of SRTM (Shuttle Radar Topography Mission) in Niger Republic. We explored the GDEMs to evaluate large void and erroneous pixel areas. GDEMs were then compared to three kinds of ground control data located on several sites and all merged data after vertical datum matching. We also analysed the vertical accuracy by land cover and compared GDEMs to each other. We finally validated the gravity database heights by using the relatively most accurate GDEM. All GDEMs still contain void pixels except for SRTM3 CGIAR, it was then retained for the assessment with 1 arc-second GDEMs. The vertical accuracies in terms of RMS (Root Mean Square) and in m are: ASTER (6.2, 8.0, 9.8 and 9.2), AW3D30 (2.2, 2.1, 1.8 and 1.6), SRTM1 (3.8, 4.3, 2.5 and 2.9) and SRTM3 (3.7, 4.1, 2.4 and 2.7) compared to levelling data, local DEM of Imouraren, GPS (Global Positioning System) data and all merged data. Absolute height differences are less than 10 m at 74.00%, 99.99%, 99.91% and 99.98% for ASTER, AW3D30, SRTM1 and SRTM3, respectively. AW3D30 is the most accurate and ASTER is the least accurate. For all GDEMs, different accuracies were found depending on land cover classes that could be caused by the random spatial distribution of validation data. Small differences were observed between SRTM and AW3D30 and large values between the two models and ASTER similarly. The gravity database was validated using AW3D30, large values of height differences were found in the northern part in agreement with the database specifications and in the southern part indicating erroneous elevations.     

SRTM vs ASTER elevation products. Comparison for two regions in Crete,Greece

The Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM) collected elevation data over 80% of earth's land area during an 11‐day Space Shuttle mission. With a horizontal resolution of 3 arc sec, SRTM represents the best quality, freely available digital elevation models (DEMs) worldwide. Since the SRTM elevation data are unedited, they contain occasional voids, or gaps, where the terrain lay in the radar beam's shadow or in areas of extremely low radar backscatter, such as sea, dams, lakes and virtually any water‐covered surface. In contrast to the short duration of the SRTM mission, the ongoing Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer (ASTER) is continuously collecting elevation information with a horizontal resolution of 15 m. In this paper we compared DEM products created from SRTM data with respective products created from ASTER stereo‐pairs. The study areas were located in Crete, Greece. Absolute DEMs produced photogrammetricaly from ASTER using differentially corrected GPS measurements provided the benchmark to infer vertical and planimetric accuracy of the 3 arc sec finished SRTM product. Spatial filters were used to detect and remove the voids, as well as to interpolate the missing values in DEMs. Comparison between SRTM‐ and ASTER‐derived DEMs allowed a qualitative assessment of the horizontal and vertical component of the error, while statistical measures were used to estimate their vertical accuracy. Elevation difference between SRTM and ASTER products was evaluated using the root mean square error (RMSE), which was found to be less than 50 m.     

A mutual assessment of the uncertainties of digital elevation models using the triple collocation technique

This study investigates the uncertainties of digital elevation models (DEMs) using the triple collocation (TC) method. DEMs from satellite missions are important for many geoscience disciplines and for economic benefits and are freely available. Validating DEMs is necessary to select an appropriate model for a given region and application. Provided certain assumptions about the error structure of any three data sets – measuring the same phenomenon – can be made, the TC approach can be used to provide an unbiased and scaled estimate of the error variances of the data sets, without requiring a reference data. We compared the TC approach to the traditional approach of using a reference data set using the Shuttle Radar Topography Mission version 4.1 (SRTM v4.1) DEM, ASTER (the Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer) GDEM (Global DEM) version 2, the 1 arc-minute global relief model (ETOPO1), a DEM compiled by the Survey and Mapping Division of Ghana (SMD DEM), and 545 ground control stations (GCSs). The error estimates for the DEMs via TC were considerably smaller than those obtained from the reference-based approach. As an example, the best performing DEM (SRTM v4.1) recorded a root-mean-square error (RMSE) of 15.601 m using the GCSs as reference, while its TC-derived accuracy was 6.517 m. We note that based on the results of the TC, the estimated error of the GCSs is approximately 14 m. Using a data set with an error of 14 m to validate other data sets is certainly bound to result in unfavorable results. Thus, we have demonstrated in this work that the TC approach is able to provide an unbiased error of DEMs. The approach is important even for regions where GCSs are highly accurate, but more so for regions with low-quality GCSs.     

Combination of SRTM3 and repeat ASTER data for deriving alpine glacier flow velocities in the Bhutan Himalaya

The present study evaluates the fusion of DEMs from the Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer (ASTER) instrument and the Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM). The study area consists of high elevation glaciers draining through the rough topography of the Bhutan Himalayas. It turns out that the ASTER-derived and SRTM3 DEMs have similar accuracy over the study area, but the SRTM3 DEM contains less gross errors. However, for rough topography large sections of the SRTM3 DEM contain no data. We therefore compile a combined SRTM3-ASTER DEM. From this final composite-master DEM, we produce repeat ASTER orthoimages from which we evaluate the DEM quality and derive glacier surface velocities through image matching. The glacier tongues north of the Himalayan main ridge, which enter the Tibet plateau, show maximum surface velocities in the order of 100-200 m year⁻¹. In contrast, the ice within the glacier tongues south of the main ridge flows with a few tens of meters per year. These findings have a number of implications, among others for glacier dynamics, glacier response to climate change, glacier lake development, or glacial erosion. The study indicates that space-based remote sensing can provide new insights into the magnitude of selected surface processes and feedback mechanisms that govern mountain geodynamics.