Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Earth Surface Proces...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
Earth Surface Processes and Landforms
Article . 2019 . Peer-reviewed
License: Wiley Online Library User Agreement
Data sources: Crossref
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
versions View all 3 versions
addClaim

Evaluating sources of uncertainty and variability in rock glacier inventories

Authors: Francesco Brardinoni; Riccardo Scotti; Rudolf Sailer; Volkmar Mair;

Evaluating sources of uncertainty and variability in rock glacier inventories

Abstract

AbstractThis paper aims to evaluate sources of uncertainty and variability associated with rock glacier inventories compiled from remotely sensed imagery. To this end, we ran three mapping exercises in Kaiserbergtal, Austria. To evaluate interactions between mapping style and imagery resolution, we asked six operators to map and assess the degree of activity of all rock glaciers they could identify – first on Google Earth™ (GE) imagery and then on a set of higher‐resolution orthophotos and LiDAR‐derived images (LO) (Exercise 1). To compare the mapping attributes on a common set of rock glaciers, we asked 14 operators to delineate the outline of four designated rock glaciers (Exercise 2) and to classify the activity of 15 designated rock glaciers (Exercise 3) on LO. Results show strikingly high inter‐operator variability. Specifically, we show that the number of mapped rock glaciers on GE can vary up to a factor of 3, and that using LO lowers this figure to a factor of 2, while producing an increase in the number of mapped landforms, which become systematically smaller (Exercise 1). Examination of polygon outlines identifies highest inter‐operator variability at the transition with the rooting zone and, in polymorphic rock glaciers, on adjacent creeping lobes. Variability is higher for relict landforms (Exercise 2). Operators’ activity assessments, evaluated against an independent quantitative activity index (RGI), display reasonable agreement for active and relict landforms, whereas inactive counterparts meet least consensus and therefore are problematic (Exercise 3). We further show that this variability in mapping outcomes propagates across compound variables, and must be considered when assessing uncertainties and confidence levels of environmental evaluations that rely on rock glacier inventories, such as the lower altitudinal limit of discontinuous permafrost, or water storage potential. We call for an international effort to establish guidelines for rock glacier classification and mapping, towards more homogeneous inventories. © 2019 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Countries
Austria, Italy
Keywords

activity assessment; geomorphological mapping; imagery resolution; inter-operator variability; remote sensing; rock glacier, PROTALUS RAMPARTS, MAXIMUM, REGIONAL INVENTORY, ALPS, PERMAFROST DISTRIBUTION, ANDES, VALAIS, CREEP, DEGLACIATION, NORTHERN TIEN-SHAN

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    59
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 1%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
59
Top 1%
Top 10%
Top 10%
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!