Standard
Quantifying Uncertainty for Estimates Derived from Error Matrices in Land Cover Mapping Applications: The Case for a Bayesian Approach. / Phillipson, Jordan
; Blair, Gordon; Henrys, Peter.
Environmental Software Systems. Data Science in Action: 13th IFIP WG 5.11 International Symposium, ISESS 2020, Wageningen, The Netherlands, February 5–7, 2020, Proceedings. ed. / Ioannis N. Athanasiadis; Steven P. Frysinger; Gerald Schimak; Willem Jan Knibbe. Cham: Springer, 2020. p. 151-164 (IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology; Vol. 554).
Research output: Contribution in Book/Report/Proceedings - With ISBN/ISSN › Conference contribution/Paper › peer-review
Harvard
Phillipson, J
, Blair, G & Henrys, P 2020,
Quantifying Uncertainty for Estimates Derived from Error Matrices in Land Cover Mapping Applications: The Case for a Bayesian Approach. in IN Athanasiadis, SP Frysinger, G Schimak & WJ Knibbe (eds),
Environmental Software Systems. Data Science in Action: 13th IFIP WG 5.11 International Symposium, ISESS 2020, Wageningen, The Netherlands, February 5–7, 2020, Proceedings. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology, vol. 554, Springer, Cham, pp. 151-164.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39815-6_15
APA
Phillipson, J.
, Blair, G., & Henrys, P. (2020).
Quantifying Uncertainty for Estimates Derived from Error Matrices in Land Cover Mapping Applications: The Case for a Bayesian Approach. In I. N. Athanasiadis, S. P. Frysinger, G. Schimak, & W. J. Knibbe (Eds.),
Environmental Software Systems. Data Science in Action: 13th IFIP WG 5.11 International Symposium, ISESS 2020, Wageningen, The Netherlands, February 5–7, 2020, Proceedings (pp. 151-164). (IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology; Vol. 554). Springer.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39815-6_15
Vancouver
Phillipson J
, Blair G, Henrys P.
Quantifying Uncertainty for Estimates Derived from Error Matrices in Land Cover Mapping Applications: The Case for a Bayesian Approach. In Athanasiadis IN, Frysinger SP, Schimak G, Knibbe WJ, editors, Environmental Software Systems. Data Science in Action: 13th IFIP WG 5.11 International Symposium, ISESS 2020, Wageningen, The Netherlands, February 5–7, 2020, Proceedings. Cham: Springer. 2020. p. 151-164. (IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology). Epub 2020 Jan 29. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-39815-6_15
Author
Phillipson, Jordan
; Blair, Gordon ; Henrys, Peter. /
Quantifying Uncertainty for Estimates Derived from Error Matrices in Land Cover Mapping Applications : The Case for a Bayesian Approach. Environmental Software Systems. Data Science in Action: 13th IFIP WG 5.11 International Symposium, ISESS 2020, Wageningen, The Netherlands, February 5–7, 2020, Proceedings. editor / Ioannis N. Athanasiadis ; Steven P. Frysinger ; Gerald Schimak ; Willem Jan Knibbe. Cham : Springer, 2020. pp. 151-164 (IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology).
Bibtex
@inproceedings{43728e4409d34f66ba2dec705187627f,
title = "Quantifying Uncertainty for Estimates Derived from Error Matrices in Land Cover Mapping Applications: The Case for a Bayesian Approach",
abstract = "The use of land cover mappings built using remotely sensed imagery data has become increasingly popular in recent years. However, these mappings are ultimately only models. Consequently, it is vital for one to be able to assess and verify the quality of a mapping and quantify uncertainty for any estimates that are derived from them in a reliable manner.For this, the use of validation sets and error matrices is a long standard practice in land cover mapping applications. In this paper, we review current state of the art methods for quantifying uncertainty for estimates obtained from error matrices in a land cover mapping context. Specifically, we review methods based on their transparency, generalisability, suitability when stratified sampling and suitability in low count situations. This is done with the use of a third-party case study to act as a motivating and demonstrative example throughout the paper.The main finding of this paper is there is a major issue of transparency for methods that quantify uncertainty in terms of confidence intervals (frequentist methods). This is primarily because of the difficulty of analysing nominal coverages in common situations. Effectively, this leaves one without the necessary tools to know when a frequentist method is reliable in all but a few niche situations. The paper then discusses how a Bayesian approach may be better suited as a default method for uncertainty quantification when judged by our criteria.",
keywords = "Uncertainty quantification, Map assessment, Bayesian, Land cover maps",
author = "Jordan Phillipson and Gordon Blair and Peter Henrys",
year = "2020",
month = feb,
day = "5",
doi = "10.1007/978-3-030-39815-6_15",
language = "English",
isbn = "9783030398149",
series = "IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology",
publisher = "Springer",
pages = "151--164",
editor = "Athanasiadis, {Ioannis N.} and Frysinger, {Steven P.} and Gerald Schimak and Knibbe, {Willem Jan}",
booktitle = "Environmental Software Systems. Data Science in Action",
}
RIS
TY - GEN
T1 - Quantifying Uncertainty for Estimates Derived from Error Matrices in Land Cover Mapping Applications
T2 - The Case for a Bayesian Approach
AU - Phillipson, Jordan
AU - Blair, Gordon
AU - Henrys, Peter
PY - 2020/2/5
Y1 - 2020/2/5
N2 - The use of land cover mappings built using remotely sensed imagery data has become increasingly popular in recent years. However, these mappings are ultimately only models. Consequently, it is vital for one to be able to assess and verify the quality of a mapping and quantify uncertainty for any estimates that are derived from them in a reliable manner.For this, the use of validation sets and error matrices is a long standard practice in land cover mapping applications. In this paper, we review current state of the art methods for quantifying uncertainty for estimates obtained from error matrices in a land cover mapping context. Specifically, we review methods based on their transparency, generalisability, suitability when stratified sampling and suitability in low count situations. This is done with the use of a third-party case study to act as a motivating and demonstrative example throughout the paper.The main finding of this paper is there is a major issue of transparency for methods that quantify uncertainty in terms of confidence intervals (frequentist methods). This is primarily because of the difficulty of analysing nominal coverages in common situations. Effectively, this leaves one without the necessary tools to know when a frequentist method is reliable in all but a few niche situations. The paper then discusses how a Bayesian approach may be better suited as a default method for uncertainty quantification when judged by our criteria.
AB - The use of land cover mappings built using remotely sensed imagery data has become increasingly popular in recent years. However, these mappings are ultimately only models. Consequently, it is vital for one to be able to assess and verify the quality of a mapping and quantify uncertainty for any estimates that are derived from them in a reliable manner.For this, the use of validation sets and error matrices is a long standard practice in land cover mapping applications. In this paper, we review current state of the art methods for quantifying uncertainty for estimates obtained from error matrices in a land cover mapping context. Specifically, we review methods based on their transparency, generalisability, suitability when stratified sampling and suitability in low count situations. This is done with the use of a third-party case study to act as a motivating and demonstrative example throughout the paper.The main finding of this paper is there is a major issue of transparency for methods that quantify uncertainty in terms of confidence intervals (frequentist methods). This is primarily because of the difficulty of analysing nominal coverages in common situations. Effectively, this leaves one without the necessary tools to know when a frequentist method is reliable in all but a few niche situations. The paper then discusses how a Bayesian approach may be better suited as a default method for uncertainty quantification when judged by our criteria.
KW - Uncertainty quantification
KW - Map assessment
KW - Bayesian
KW - Land cover maps
U2 - 10.1007/978-3-030-39815-6_15
DO - 10.1007/978-3-030-39815-6_15
M3 - Conference contribution/Paper
SN - 9783030398149
T3 - IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology
SP - 151
EP - 164
BT - Environmental Software Systems. Data Science in Action
A2 - Athanasiadis, Ioannis N.
A2 - Frysinger, Steven P.
A2 - Schimak, Gerald
A2 - Knibbe, Willem Jan
PB - Springer
CY - Cham
ER -