CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 64

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Accuracy assessment of the global TanDEM-X digital elevation model in a mountain environment

Gdulová, Kateřina, Marešová, Jana, Moudrý, Vítězslav·2020·Remote Sensing of Environment
DOI 10.1016/j.rse.2020.111724
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The past two decades have been prolific in production of global or near-global Digital Elevation Models (DEMs) derived from satellite data. The most recent addition to the family of global DEMs is the TanDEM-X DEM with resolution of 0.4 arc sec. DEMs are essential for a wide range of environmental applications, many of which are related to mountains including studies on natural hazards, forestry or glacier mass changes. However, synthetic aperture radar interferometry used for acquisition of TanDEM-X DEM is especially challenging over steep and irregular mountain surfaces due to shadowing and foreshortening effects. In this study, we assessed the absolute vertical accuracy of TanDEM-X DEM in European mountains. We compared it with both a Digital Terrain Model (DTM) and a Digital Surface Model (DSM) derived from airborne laser scanning data. Our results indicate that the height error of TanDEM-X DEM expressed as absolute deviation at the 90% quantile is consistent with the 10 m mission specification benchmark. We further concentrated on the absolute height error with respect to environmental characteristics (i.e. forested and non-forested areas, slope, and aspect). The comparison of TanDEM-X DEM with a reference DTM showed a positive vertical offset; however, the mean error differed greatly between forested and non-forested areas. When compared to reference DSM, our results showed a slight underestimation. We observed the highest underestimation in deciduous forests, followed…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.rse.2020.111724

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Previous studies have identified a significant error discrepancy in global DEMs within densely forested areas, primarily due to sensor limitations when accurately capturing terrain elevation.

    “Previous studies have identified a significant error discrepancy in global DEMs within densely forested areas [49][50][51][52], primarily due to sensor limitations when accurately capturing terrain elevation.”

    From ANADEM: A Digital Terrain Model for South America (2024) · cites this paper as [51]

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 51

  1. Archer, 2018, Comparing TanDEM-X data with frequently used DEMs for flood inundation modeling, Water Resour. Res., 54, 10, 10.1029/2018WR023688 · DOI
  2. Aslan, 2016, Mapping spatial distribution and biomass of coastal wetland vegetation in Indonesian Papua by combining active and passive remotely sensed data, Remote Sens. Environ., 183, 65, 10.1016/j.rse.2016.04.026 · DOI
  3. Baade, 2016, TanDEM-X IDEM precision and accuracy assessment based on a large assembly of differential GNSS measurements in Kruger National Park, South Africa, ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens., 119, 496, 10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2016.05.005 · DOI
  4. Boulton, 2018, Which DEM is best for analyzing fluvial landscape development in mountainous terrains?, Geomorphology, 310, 168, 10.1016/j.geomorph.2018.03.002 · DOI
  5. Bourgine, 2005, Assessment of C-band SRTM DEM in a dense equatorial forest zone, Compt. Rendus Geosci., 337, 1225, 10.1016/j.crte.2005.06.006 · DOI
  6. Bühler, 2013, Automated identification of potential snow avalanche release areas based on digital elevation models, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 13, 1321, 10.5194/nhess-13-1321-2013 · DOI
  7. Dehecq, 2016, Elevation changes inferred from TanDEM-X data over the Mont-Blanc area: impact of the X-band interferometric bias, IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing, 9, 3870, 10.1109/JSTARS.2016.2581482 · DOI
  8. Eckerstorfer, 2016, Remote sensing of snow avalanches: recent advances, potential, and limitations, Cold Reg. Sci. Technol., 121, 126, 10.1016/j.coldregions.2015.11.001 · DOI
  9. Farr, 2007, The shuttle radar topography mission, Rev. Geophys., 45
  10. González-Moradas, 2020, Evaluation of ASTER GDEM2, SRTMv3. 0, ALOS AW3D30 and TanDEM-X DEMs for the Peruvian Andes against highly accurate GNSS ground control points and geomorphological-hydrological metrics, Remote Sens. Environ., 237, 10.1016/j.rse.2019.111509 · DOI
  11. Gorokhovich, 2006, Accuracy assessment of the processed SRTM-based elevation data by CGIAR using field data from USA and Thailand and its relation to the terrain characteristics, Remote Sens. Environ., 104, 409, 10.1016/j.rse.2006.05.012 · DOI
  12. Grohmann, 2018, Evaluation of TanDEM-X DEMs on selected Brazilian sites: comparison with SRTM, ASTER GDEM and ALOS AW3D30, Remote Sens. Environ., 212, 121, 10.1016/j.rse.2018.04.043 · DOI
  13. Harding, 2005, ICESat waveform measurements of within‐footprint topographic relief and vegetation vertical structure, Geophysical research letters, 32, 10.1029/2005GL023471 · DOI
  14. Hawker, 2018, Perspectives on digital elevation model (DEM) simulation for flood modeling in the absence of a high-accuracy open access global DEM, Front. Earth Sci., 6, 1
  15. Hawker, 2019, Accuracy assessment of the TanDEM-X 90 digital elevation model for selected floodplain sites, Remote Sens. Environ., 232, 10.1016/j.rse.2019.111319 · DOI · Paper page
  16. Hofton, 2006, Validation of SRTM elevations over vegetated and non-vegetated terrain using medium footprint lidar, Photogrammetric Engineering & Remote Sensing, 72, 279, 10.14358/PERS.72.3.279 · DOI · Paper page
  17. Höhle, 2009, Accuracy assessment of digital elevation models by means of robust statistical methods, ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens., 64, 398, 10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2009.02.003 · DOI · Paper page
  18. Holmes, 2000, Error in a USGS 30-meter digital elevation model and its impact on terrain modeling, Journal of Hydrology, 233, 154, 10.1016/S0022-1694(00)00229-8 · DOI
  19. Kellndorfer, 2004, Vegetation height estimation from shuttle radar topography mission and national elevation datasets, Remote Sens. Environ., 93, 339, 10.1016/j.rse.2004.07.017 · DOI
  20. Kenward, 2000, Effects of digital elevation model accuracy on hydrologic predictions, Remote Sens. Environ., 74, 432, 10.1016/S0034-4257(00)00136-X · DOI · Paper page
  21. Khati, 2017, Analysis of seasonal effects on forest parameter estimation of Indian deciduous forest using TerraSAR-X PolInSAR acquisitions, Remote Sens. Environ., 199, 265, 10.1016/j.rse.2017.07.019 · DOI
  22. Khosravipour, 2016, Generating spike-free digital surface models using LiDAR raw point clouds: a new approach for forestry applications, Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinf., 52, 104
  23. Kolecka, 2014, Assessment of the accuracy of SRTM C-and X-band high mountain elevation data: a case study of the Polish Tatra Mountains, Pure Appl. Geophys., 171, 897, 10.1007/s00024-013-0695-5 · DOI · Paper page
  24. Kramm, 2019, A relief dependent evaluation of digital elevation models on different scales for northern Chile, ISPRS Int. J. Geo Inf., 8, 430, 10.3390/ijgi8100430 · DOI
  25. Krieger, 2013, TanDEM-X: a radar interferometer with two formation-flying satellites, Acta Astronautica, 89, 83, 10.1016/j.actaastro.2013.03.008 · DOI
  26. Kropáček, 2014, Estimation of mass balance of the Grosser Aletschgletscher, Swiss Alps, from ICESat laser altimetry data and digital elevation models, Remote Sens., 6, 5614, 10.3390/rs6065614 · DOI
  27. Kubanek, 2015, Volumetric change quantification of the 2010 Merapi eruption using TanDEM-X InSAR, Remote Sensing of Environment, 164, 16, 10.1016/j.rse.2015.02.027 · DOI
  28. Ludwig, 2006, Validation of digital elevation models from SRTM X-SAR for applications in hydrologic modeling, ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens., 60, 339, 10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2006.05.003 · DOI · Paper page
  29. Moudrý, 2013, Relative importance of climate, topography, and habitats for breeding wetland birds with different latitudinal distributions in the Czech Republic, Appl. Geogr., 44, 165, 10.1016/j.apgeog.2013.08.001 · DOI
  30. Moudrý, 2018, On the use of global DEMs in ecological modelling and the accuracy of new bare-earth DEMs, Ecol. Model., 383, 3, 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2018.05.006 · DOI
  31. Moudrý, 2019, Comparison of a commercial and home-assembled fixed-wing UAV for terrain mapping of a post-mining site under leaf-off conditions, Int. J. Remote Sens., 40, 555, 10.1080/01431161.2018.1516311 · DOI
  32. Olesk, 2015, Seasonal differences in forest height estimation from interferometric TanDEM-X coherence data, IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing, 8, 5565, 10.1109/JSTARS.2015.2501648 · DOI
  33. O'Loughlin, 2016, A multi-sensor approach towards a global vegetation corrected SRTM DEM product, Remote Sens. Environ., 182, 49, 10.1016/j.rse.2016.04.018 · DOI · Paper page
  34. Podgórski, 2019, Performance assessment of TanDEM-X DEM for mountain glacier elevation change detection, Remote Sens., 11, 187, 10.3390/rs11020187 · DOI
  35. Purinton, 2017, Validation of digital elevation models (DEMs) and comparison of geomorphic metrics on the southern Central Andean Plateau, Earth Surface Dynamics, 5, 211, 10.5194/esurf-5-211-2017 · DOI
  36. Reuter, 2007, An evaluation of void-filling interpolation methods for SRTM data, Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci., 21, 983, 10.1080/13658810601169899 · DOI
  37. Rexer, 2016, Evaluation of intermediate TanDEM-X digital elevation data products over Tasmania using other digital elevation models and accurate heights from the Australian National Gravity Database, Aust. J. Earth Sci., 63, 599, 10.1080/08120099.2016.1238440 · DOI
  38. Rizzoli, 2012, Relative height error analysis of TanDEM-X elevation data, ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens., 73, 30, 10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2012.06.004 · DOI
  39. Rizzoli, 2017, Generation and performance assessment of the global TanDEM-X digital elevation model, ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens., 132, 119, 10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2017.08.008 · DOI
  40. Sadeghi, 2017, Effects of TanDEM-X acquisition parameters on the accuracy of digital surface models of a boreal forest canopy, Can. J. Remote. Sens., 43, 194, 10.1080/07038992.2017.1291336 · DOI
  41. Sampson, 2015, A high-resolution global flood hazard model, Water Resour. Res., 51, 7358, 10.1002/2015WR016954 · DOI
  42. Schumann, 2008, Comparison of remotely sensed water stages from LiDAR, topographic contours and SRTM, ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens., 63, 283, 10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2007.09.004 · DOI
  43. Shortridge, 2011, Spatial structure and landscape associations of SRTM error, Remote Sens. Environ., 115, 1576, 10.1016/j.rse.2011.02.017 · DOI
  44. Siart, 2009, Combining digital elevation data (SRTM/ASTER), high resolution satellite imagery (Quickbird) and GIS for geomorphological mapping: a multi-component case study on Mediterranean karst in Central Crete, Geomorphology, 112, 106, 10.1016/j.geomorph.2009.05.010 · DOI
  45. Solberg, 2010, Deriving forest monitoring variables from X-band InSAR SRTM height, Can. J. Remote. Sens., 36, 68, 10.5589/m10-025 · DOI
  46. Toutin, 2002, Impact of terrain slope and aspect on radargrammetric DEM accuracy, ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens., 57, 228, 10.1016/S0924-2716(02)00123-5 · DOI
  47. Tridon, 2013, TanDEM-X: DEM acquisition in the third year era, International Journal of Space Science and Engineering, 5, 367, 10.1504/IJSPACESE.2013.059270 · DOI
  48. Vassilaki, 2020, TanDEM-X DEM: comparative performance review employing LIDAR data and DSMs, ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens., 160, 33, 10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2019.11.015 · DOI
  49. Wessel, 2018, Accuracy assessment of the global TanDEM-X digital elevation model with GPS data, ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens., 139, 171, 10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2018.02.017 · DOI · Paper page
  50. Yamazaki, 2017, A high-accuracy map of global terrain elevations, Geophys. Res. Lett., 44, 5844, 10.1002/2017GL072874 · DOI · Paper page
  51. Zink, 2014, TanDEM-X: the new global DEM takes shape, IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Magazine, 2, 8, 10.1109/MGRS.2014.2318895 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Gdulová, K., Marešová, J., & Moudrý, V.
Venue
Remote Sensing of Environment
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-05
Volume
241
Pages
111724
ISSN
0034-4257
DOI
10.1016/j.rse.2020.111724
Cited by
64
References
1
Language
en
Licence

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