CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 19

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Spatial Simulation Modeling of Settlement Distribution Driven by Random Forest: Consideration of Landscape Visibility

Zheng, Minrui, Tang, Wenwu, Ogundiran, Akinwumi, Yang, Jianxin·2020·Sustainability
DOI 10.3390/su12114748
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Settlement models help to understand the social–ecological functioning of landscape and associated land use and land cover change. One of the issues of settlement modeling is that models are typically used to explore the relationship between settlement locations and associated influential factors (e.g., slope and aspect). However, few studies in settlement modeling adopted landscape visibility analysis. Landscape visibility provides useful information for understanding human decision-making associated with the establishment of settlements. In the past years, machine learning algorithms have demonstrated their capabilities in improving the performance of the settlement modeling and particularly capturing the nonlinear relationship between settlement locations and their drivers. However, simulation models using machine learning algorithms in settlement modeling are still not well studied. Moreover, overfitting issues and optimization of model parameters are major challenges for most machine learning algorithms. Therefore, in this study, we sought to pursue two research objectives. First, we aimed to evaluate the contribution of viewsheds and landscape visibility to the simulation modeling of - settlement locations. The second objective is to examine the performance of the machine learning algorithm-based simulation models for settlement location studies. Our study region is located in the metropolitan area of Oyo Empire, Nigeria, West Africa, ca. AD 1570–1830, and its pre-Imperial antecedents, ca. AD 1360–1570. We developed an event-driven spatial simulation model enabled by random forest algorithm to represent dynamics in settlement systems in our study region. Experimental results demonstrate that viewsheds and landscape visibility may offer more insights into unveiling the underlying mechanism that drives settlement locations. Random forest algorithm, as a machine learning algorithm, provide solid support for establishing the relationship between settlement occurrences and their drivers.

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 · 10.3390/su12114748

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

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?

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 69

  1. Veldkamp, 1996, CLUE-CR: An integrated multi-scale model to simulate land use change scenarios in Costa Rica, Ecol. Model., 91, 231, 10.1016/0304-3800(95)00158-1 · DOI
  2. Swihart, R.K., and Moore, J.E. (2004). Conserving Biodiversity in Agricultural Landscapes: Model-Based Planning Tools, Purdue University Press.
  3. Kohler, T.A., and Carr, E. (, January September). Swarm-based modeling of prehistoric settlement systems in southwestern North America. Proceedings of the Colloquium II, UISPP, XIIIth Congress, Forli, Italy.
  4. Tang, 2009, Simulated village locations in Thailand: A multi-scale model including a neural network approach, Landsc. Ecol., 24, 557, 10.1007/s10980-009-9322-3 · DOI
  5. Wescott, K.L., and Brandon, R.J. (2003). Practical Applications of GIS for Archaeologists: A Predictive Modelling Toolkit, CRC Press.
  6. Romanowska, 2015, So you think you can model? A guide to building and evaluating archaeological simulation models of dispersals, Hum. Biol., 87, 169, 10.13110/humanbiology.87.3.0169 · DOI
  7. Kohler, T.A., and Parker, S.C. (1986). Predictive models for archaeological resource location. Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory, Elsevier. · DOI
  8. Brandt, 1992, An experiment in archaeological site location: Modeling in the Netherlands using GIS techniques, World Archaeol., 24, 268, 10.1080/00438243.1992.9980207 · DOI · Paper page
  9. Kohler, T.A., Kresl, J., Van West, C., Carr, E., and Wilshusen, R.H. (2000). Be there then: A modeling approach to settlement determinants and spatial efficiency among late ancestral Pueblo populations of the Mesa Verde region, US Southwest. Dynmics in Human Primate Societies: Agent-Based Modeling of Social and Spatial Processes, Oxford University Press. · DOI
  10. Bi, 2013, Spatial distribution of prehistoric settlement sites in Zhengzhou-Luoyang region based on index model, Prog. Geogr., 32, 1454
  11. Wheatley, D. (1995). Cumulative viewshed analysis: A GIS-based method for investigating intervisibility, and its archaeological application. Archaeology and GIS: A European Perspective, Routledge.
  12. Gaffney, 1996, Extending GIS methods for regional archaeology: The Wroxeter Hinterland Project, Interfacing the Past: Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology CAA95: Analecta Praehistorica Leidensia 28, Volume 2, 297
  13. Sevenant, 2007, Settlement models, land use and visibility in rural landscapes: Two case studies in Greece, Landsc. Urban Plan., 80, 362, 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2006.09.004 · DOI
  14. Gillings, 2012, Landscape phenomenology, GIS and the role of affordance, J. Archaeol. Method Theory, 19, 601, 10.1007/s10816-012-9137-4 · DOI · Paper page
  15. Eve, 2014, A house with a view? Multi-model inference, visibility fields, and point process analysis of a Bronze Age settlement on Leskernick Hill (Cornwall, UK), J. Archaeol. Sci., 43, 267, 10.1016/j.jas.2013.12.019 · DOI · Paper page
  16. Brughmans, 2017, Visibility network patterns and methods for studying visual relational phenomena in archeology, Front. Digit. Humanit., 4, 17, 10.3389/fdigh.2017.00017 · DOI
  17. Barceló, J.A. (, January March). Computational intelligence in archaeology. State of the art. Proceedings of the Making History Interactive. Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology (CAA), Barcelona, Spain.
  18. Venditti, C.P., and Mele, P. (2020). Digital Transformation and Archaeology: Innovating Using the Cloud and Artificial Intelligence. Developing Effective Communication Skills in Archaeology, IGI Global. · DOI
  19. Oonk, 2015, A supervised machine-learning approach towards geochemical predictive modelling in archaeology, J. Archaeol. Sci., 59, 80, 10.1016/j.jas.2015.04.002 · DOI · Paper page
  20. Czibula, 2016, Machine learning-based approaches for predicting stature from archaeological skeletal remains using long bone lengths, J. Archaeol. Sci., 69, 85, 10.1016/j.jas.2016.04.004 · DOI
  21. Ren, 2014, Optimal parameters selection for BP neural network based on particle swarm optimization: A case study of wind speed forecasting, Knowl.-Based Syst., 56, 226, 10.1016/j.knosys.2013.11.015 · DOI
  22. Zheng, 2019, Hyperparameter optimization of neural network-driven spatial models accelerated using cyber-enabled high-performance computing, Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci., 33, 314, 10.1080/13658816.2018.1530355 · DOI
  23. Breiman, 2001, Random forests, Mach. Learn., 45, 5, 10.1023/A:1010933404324 · DOI · Paper page
  24. Ghimire, 2012, An assessment of the effectiveness of a random forest classifier for land-cover classification, ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens., 67, 93, 10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2011.11.002 · DOI
  25. Ghimire, 2010, Contextual land-cover classification: Incorporating spatial dependence in land-cover classification models using random forests and the Getis statistic, Remote Sens. Lett., 1, 45, 10.1080/01431160903252327 · DOI
  26. Gong, Z., Tang, W., and Thill, J.-C. (, January November). Parallelization of ensemble neural networks for spatial land-use modeling. Proceedings of the 5th ACM SIGSPATIAL International Workshop on Location-Based Social Networks, Redondo Beach, CA, USA.
  27. Steele, 2000, Combining multiple classifiers: An application using spatial and remotely sensed information for land cover type mapping, Remote Sens. Environ., 74, 545, 10.1016/S0034-4257(00)00145-0 · DOI
  28. Llobera, 2007, Modeling visibility through vegetation, Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci., 21, 799, 10.1080/13658810601169865 · DOI · Paper page
  29. Fry, 2004, Locating archaeological sites in the landscape: A hierarchical approach based on landscape indicators, Landsc. Urban Plan., 67, 97, 10.1016/S0169-2046(03)00031-8 · DOI
  30. Higuchi, T. (1986). The Visual and Spatial Structure of Landscapes, Mit Press.
  31. Antrop, M. (, January September). Invisible connectivity in rural landscapes. Proceedings of the 2nd International Seminar of IALE, Connectivity in Landscape Ecology, Munster, Germany.
  32. Nutsford, 2015, Personalising the viewshed: Visibility analysis from the human perspective, Appl. Geogr., 62, 1, 10.1016/j.apgeog.2015.04.004 · DOI
  33. Wheatley, 2000, Vision, perception and GIS: Developing enriched approaches to the study of archaeological visibility, Beyond the Map: Archaeology and Spatial Technologies, Volume 321, 1
  34. Rua, 2013, Assessment of the Lines of Torres Vedras defensive system with visibility analysis, J. Archaeol. Sci., 40, 2113, 10.1016/j.jas.2012.12.012 · DOI
  35. Heyns, A., and Van Vuuren, J. (2013, January 15–18). Terrain visibility-dependent facility location through fast dynamic step-distance viewshed estimation within a raster environment. Proceedings of the 2013 Annual Conference of the Operations Research Society of South Africa, Stellenbosch, South Africa.
  36. Brughmans, 2018, Introducing visual neighbourhood configurations for total viewsheds, J. Archaeol. Sci., 96, 14, 10.1016/j.jas.2018.05.006 · DOI
  37. Lake, 2013, Compute-Intensive GIS Visibility Analysis of the Settings of Prehistoric Stone Circles, Comput. Approach. Archaeol. Spaces, 60, 213
  38. Lake, M.W. (2015). Explaining the past with ABM: On modelling philosophy. Agent-Based Modeling and Simulation in Archaeology, Springer. · DOI
  39. Jones, 2006, Using viewshed analysis to explore settlement choice: A case study of the Onondaga Iroquois, Am. Antiq., 71, 523, 10.2307/40035363 · DOI
  40. Cascalheira, 2014, Shellmiddens as landmarks: Visibility studies on the Mesolithic of the Muge valley (Central Portugal), J. Anthropol. Archaeol., 36, 130, 10.1016/j.jaa.2014.09.011 · DOI
  41. Benedikt, 1979, To take hold of space: Isovists and isovist fields, Environ. Plan. B Plan. Des., 6, 47, 10.1068/b060047 · DOI
  42. Turner, 2001, Visibility graphs and landscape visibility analysis, Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci., 15, 221, 10.1080/13658810151072859 · DOI
  43. McGarigal, K. (2014). Landscape pattern metrics. Wiley StatsRef: Statistics Reference Online, Wiley. · DOI
  44. Page, 2001, Knowledge-based simulation of settlement systems, Comput. Environ. Urban Syst., 25, 167, 10.1016/S0198-9715(00)00022-3 · DOI
  45. Malanson, 2006, Complexity at advancing ecotones and frontiers, Environ. Plan. A, 38, 619, 10.1068/a37340 · DOI
  46. Qi, Y. (2012). Random forest for bioinformatics. Ensemble Machine Learning, Springer. · DOI
  47. Lebedev, 2014, Random Forest ensembles for detection and prediction of Alzheimer’s disease with a good between-cohort robustness, NeuroImage Clin., 6, 115, 10.1016/j.nicl.2014.08.023 · DOI
  48. Breiman, 1996, Bagging predictors, Mach. Learn., 24, 123, 10.1007/BF00058655 · DOI · Paper page
  49. Liaw, 2002, Classification and regression by randomForest, R News, 2, 18
  50. Gislason, 2006, Random forests for land cover classification, Pattern Recognit. Lett., 27, 294, 10.1016/j.patrec.2005.08.011 · DOI
  51. Yue, D., Peng, C., Du, D., Zhang, T., Zheng, M., and Han, Q. (2017). Intelligent Computing, Networked Control, and Their Engineering Applications, In Proceedings of the International Conference on Life System Modeling and Simulation, LSMS 2017 and International Conference on Intelligent Computing for Sustainable Energy and Environment, ICSEE 2017, Nanjing, China, 22–24 September 2017, Springer. · DOI
  52. Pal, 2005, Random forest classifier for remote sensing classification, Int. J. Remote Sens., 26, 217, 10.1080/01431160412331269698 · DOI
  53. Svetnik, 2003, Random forest: A classification and regression tool for compound classification and QSAR modeling, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci., 43, 1947, 10.1021/ci034160g · DOI
  54. Bergstra, J., Yamins, D., and Cox, D.D. (, January June). Making a science of model search: Hyperparameter optimization in hundreds of dimensions for vision architectures. Proceedings of the ICML’13: the 30th International Conference on International Conference on Machine Learning, Atalanta, GA, USA.
  55. Li, L., Jamieson, K., DeSalvo, G., Rostamizadeh, A., and Talwalkar, A. (2016). Hyperband: A novel bandit-based approach to hyperparameter optimization. arXiv.
  56. Bergstra, 2012, Random search for hyper-parameter optimization, J. Mach. Learn. Res., 13, 281
  57. Cutler, 2007, Random forests for classification in ecology, Ecology, 88, 2783, 10.1890/07-0539.1 · DOI · Paper page
  58. Strobl, C., Boulesteix, A.-L., Kneib, T., Augustin, T., and Zeileis, A. (2008). Conditional variable importance for random forests. BMC Bioinform., 9. · DOI
  59. Ogundiran, 2009, Material life and domestic economy in a frontier of the Oyo Empire during the Mid-Atlantic Age, Int. J. Afr. Hist. Stud., 42, 351
  60. 1990, Field Report: Oyo Ruins of NW Yorubaland, Nigeria, J. Field Archaeol., 17, 367, 10.1179/jfa.1990.17.3.367 · DOI
  61. Adetoro, 2008, People’s Perceptions of the Old Oyo National Park, Nigeria: Germane Issues in Park Management, Environ. Res. J., 2, 182
  62. Doran, 1970, Systems theory, computer simulations and archaeology, World Archaeol., 1, 289, 10.1080/00438243.1970.9979448 · DOI
  63. Kohler, T.A. (2000). Putting social sciences together again: An introduction to the volume. Dynamics in Human and Primate Societies: Agent-Based Modelling of Social and Spatial Processes, Oxford University Press. · DOI
  64. Banks, J. (1998). Handbook of Simulation: Principles, Methodology, Advances, Applications, and Practice, John Wiley & Sons. · DOI
  65. McGarigal, K., and Marks, B.J. (1994). Fragstats: Spatial Pattern Analysis Program for Quantifying Landscape Structure. Reference Manual, Forest Science Department, Oregon State University. · DOI
  66. 2007, A caution regarding rules of thumb for variance inflation factors, Qual. Quant., 41, 673, 10.1007/s11135-006-9018-6 · DOI · Paper page
  67. Zheng, M.T., Wen, w., Ogundiran, A., Chen, T., and Yang, J. (2020). Parallel landscape visibility analysis: A case study in archaeology. High Perform. Comput. Geospatial Appl., in press. · DOI
  68. 2013, Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis for medical diagnostic test evaluation, Casp. J. Intern. Med., 4, 627
  69. Pumain, 2000, Settlement systems in the evolution, Geogr. Ann. Ser. B Hum. Geogr., 82, 73, 10.1111/j.0435-3684.2000.00075.x · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Zheng, M., Tang, W., Ogundiran, A., & Yang, J.
Venue
Sustainability
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2020-06-10
Volume
12
Issue
11
Pages
4748
ISSN
2071-1050
DOI
10.3390/su12114748
Cited by
19
References
4
Language
en
Licence
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (vor)

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