CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 257Digital Image Processing TechniquesComputational Geometry and Mesh GenerationGroundwater and Watershed Analysis

The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.

Priority-flood: An optimal depression-filling and watershed-labeling algorithm for digital elevation models

Open access
Barnes, Richard, Lehman, Clarence, Mulla, David·2014·Computers & Geosciences
DOI 10.1016/j.cageo.2013.04.024
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cageo.2013.04.024

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 40 · Cited by 257

Research works printed but not linked: 38

  1. Arge, 2003, Efficient flow computation on massive grid terrain datasets, GeoInformatica, 7, 283, 10.1023/A:1025526421410 · DOI
  2. Barnes, 2013, An efficient assignment of drainage direction over flat surfaces in raster digital elevation models, Computers and Geosciences
  3. Beucher, 1992, The morphological approach to segmentation, Optical Engineering, 34, 433
  4. Brown, 1988, Calendar queues, Communications of the ACM, 31, 1220, 10.1145/63039.63045 · DOI
  5. Ehlschlaeger, C., 1989. Using the at search algorithm to develop hydrologic models from digital elevation data. In: International Geographic Information Systems (IGIS) Symposium, vol. 89. pp. 275–281.
  6. Goh, 2003, Mlist, International Journal of Simulation-Systems Science and Technology, 4, 66
  7. Goh, R., Thng, I., 2004. Dsplay: An efficient dynamic priority queue structure for discrete event simulation. In: SimTecT Simulation Technology and Training Conference, Australia.
  8. Gomes, T.L., Magalhães, S.V.G., Andrade, M.V.A., Franklin, W.R., Pena, G.C., 2012. Computing the drainage network on huge grid terrains. In: Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGSPATIAL International Workshop on Analytics for Big Geospatial Data. BigSpatial '12. ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp. 53–60. 〈http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2447481.2447488〉 http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2447481.2447488. · DOI
  9. Hui, 2002, Felt, Simulation, 78, 343, 10.1177/0037549702078006573 · DOI
  10. Jenson, 1988, Extracting topographic structure from digital elevation data for geographic information system analysis, Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing, 54, 1593
  11. Knuth, D.E., May 1998. Sorting and searching. In: Art of Computer Programming, 2nd edition, vol. 3, Addison-Wesley Professional.
  12. Lindsay, 2005, Removal of artifact depressions from digital elevation models, Hydrological Processes, 19, 3113, 10.1002/hyp.5835 · DOI
  13. Liu, 2009, Another fast and simple DEM depression-filling algorithm based on priority queue structure, Atmospheric and Oceanic Science Letters, 2, 214, 10.1080/16742834.2009.11446800 · DOI
  14. Luengo Hendriks, 2010, Revisiting priority queues for image analysis, Pattern Recognition, 43, 3003, 10.1016/j.patcog.2010.04.002 · DOI
  15. Magalhães, 2012, A new method for computing the drainage network based on raising the level of an ocean surrounding the terrain, 391, 10.1007/978-3-642-29063-3_21 · DOI
  16. Marks, 1984, Automated basin delineation from digital elevation data, Geo-Processing, 2, 299
  17. Martz, 1998, The treatment of flat areas and depressions in automated drainage analysis of raster digital elevation models, Hydrological Processes, 12, 843, 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1085(199805)12:6<843::AID-HYP658>3.0.CO;2-R · DOI
  18. Metz, 2010, Accurate stream extraction from large, radar-based elevation models, Hydrology and Earth System Sciences Discussions, 7, 3213, 10.5194/hessd-7-3213-2010 · DOI
  19. Metz, 2011, Efficient extraction of drainage networks from massive, radar-based elevation models with least cost path search, Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 15, 667, 10.5194/hess-15-667-2011 · DOI
  20. Meyer, 1994, Topographic distance and watershed lines, Signal Processing, 38, 113, 10.1016/0165-1684(94)90060-4 · DOI
  21. Nardi, 2008, Hydrogeomorphic properties of simulated drainage patterns using digital elevation models, Hydrological Sciences Journal, 53, 1176, 10.1623/hysj.53.6.1176 · DOI
  22. O'Callaghan, 1984, The extraction of drainage networks from digital elevation data, Computer Vision, Graphics, and Image Processing, 28, 323, 10.1016/S0734-189X(84)80011-0 · DOI
  23. Oh, S., Ahn, J., 1997. Dynamic lazy calendar queue: an event list for network simulation. In: High Performance Computing on the Information Superhighway, 1997, HPC Asia'97, IEEE, pp. 254–259. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/HPC.1997.592156. · DOI
  24. Oh, S., Ahn, J., 1999. Dynamic calendar queue. In: Proceedings of 32nd Annual Simulation Symposium, 1999, IEEE, pp. 20–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/SIMSYM.1999.766449. · DOI
  25. Planchon, 2002, A fast, simple and versatile algorithm to fill the depressions of digital elevation models, Catena, 46, 159, 10.1016/S0341-8162(01)00164-3 · DOI
  26. Rönngren, 1997, A comparative study of parallel and sequential priority queue algorithms, ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation, 7, 157, 10.1145/249204.249205 · DOI
  27. Rönngren, 1991, Lazy queue, ACM SIGSIM Simulation Digest, 21, 194, 10.1145/106073.306860 · DOI
  28. Siangsukone, T., Aswakul, C., Wuttisittikulkij, L., 2003. Study of optimised bucket widths in calendar queue for discrete event simulator. In: Proceedings of Thailand's Electrical Engineering Conference (EECON-26), pp. 6–7.
  29. Soille, 1994, An efficient algorithm for drainage network extraction on DEMs, Journal of Visual Communication and Image Representation, 5, 181, 10.1006/jvci.1994.1017 · DOI
  30. Steinman, 1994, Discrete-event simulation and the event horizon, ACM SIGSIM Simulation Digest, 24, 39, 10.1145/195291.182490 · DOI
  31. Steinman, J.S., 1996. Discrete-event simulation and the event horizon part 2: event list management. In: Proceedings of the Tenth Workshop on Parallel and Distributed Simulation. PADS '96, IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, pp. 170–178. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/238788.238841. · DOI
  32. Tan, K.L., Thng, L.-J., 2000. Snoopy calendar queue. In: Proceedings of the 32nd conference on Winter simulation, WSC '00, Society for Computer Simulation International, San Diego, CA, USA, pp. 487–495.
  33. Tang, 2005, Ladder queue, ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation, 15, 175, 10.1145/1103323.1103324 · DOI
  34. Vincent, 1991, Watersheds in digital spaces, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 13, 583, 10.1109/34.87344 · DOI
  35. Wallis, C., Wallace, D., Tarboton, D., Watson, D., Schreuders, K., Tesfa, T., 2009. Hydrologic terrain processing using parallel computing. In: 18th World IMACS Congress and MODSIM09 International Congress on Modelling and Simulation, Modelling and Simulation Society of Australia and New Zealand and International Association for Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, pp. 2540–2545.
  36. Wang, 2006, An efficient method for identifying and filling surface depressions in digital elevation models for hydrologic analysis and modelling, International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 20, 193, 10.1080/13658810500433453 · DOI · Paper page
  37. Yan, G., Eidenbenz, S., 2006. Sluggish calendar queues for network simulation. In: 14th IEEE International Symposium on Modeling, Analysis, and Simulation of Computer and Telecommunication Systems, 2006, MASCOTS 2006, IEEE, pp. 127–136. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MASCOTS.2006.46. · DOI
  38. Yatziv, 2006, O(n) implementation of the fast marching algorithm, Journal of Computational Physics, 212, 393, 10.1016/j.jcp.2005.08.005 · DOI

Metadata

Authors
Barnes, R., Lehman, C., & Mulla, D.
Affiliations
University of Minnesota (US)
Corresponding author
Barnes, Richard
ORCID
Venue
Computers & Geosciences
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-01
Volume
62
Pages
117-127
ISSN
0098-3004 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.cageo.2013.04.024
OpenAlex
W2094887943
Cited by
257
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 32 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 27 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 3
FWCI
7.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Computers & Geosciences (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • the Minnesota Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund
  • the Legislative-Citizen Commission on Minnesota Resources (LCCMR)
  • the Minnesota Supercomputing Institute
  • Earth Dance Farm
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Digital Image Processing Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Graphics and Computer-Aided Design › Computational Geometry and Mesh Generation
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Groundwater and Watershed Analysis
Keywords
digital elevation model, priority queues, time complexity, parallel algorithms, flow direction determination, irregular meshes

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review