Semantically based reclassification of Danish land-use and land-cover information

References

• Ahlqvist, O., 2005. Using uncertain conceptual spaces to translate between land cover categories. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 19, 831–857.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ahlqvist, O., 2008. Extending post-classification change detection using semantic similarity metrics to overcome class heterogeneity: a study of 1992 and 2001 U.S. National Land Cover Database changes. Remote Sensing of Environment, 112, 1226–1241.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ahlqvist, O. and Shortridge, A., 2010. Spatial and semantic dimensions of landscape heterogeneity. Landscape Ecology, 25, 573–590.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, J.R., et al., 1976. A land use and land cover classification system for use with remote sensor data. USGS Professional Paper 964, Sioux Falls, SD, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Arealinformation, 2011a. Registration of protected habitat types. The Danish Nature and Environmental Portal. Available from: http://kort.arealinfo.dk/ [ Accessed 20 October 2011].
   Google Scholar
• Arealinformation, 2011b. Registration of habitat types within Natura2000 designated areas. The Danish Nature and Environmental Portal. Available from: http://kort.arealinfo.dk/ [ Accessed 20 October 2011].
   Google Scholar
• Bishr, Y., 1998. Overcoming the semantic and other barriers to GIS interoperability. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 12, 299–314.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bossard, M., Feranec, J. and Otahel, J., 2000. CORINE land cover technical guide – Addendum 2000. EEA technical report 40. Copenhagen: European Environment Agency.
   Google Scholar
• Bratasanu, D., Nedelcu, I., and Datcu, M., 2011. Bridging the semantic gap for satellite image annotation and automatic mapping applications. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing, 4, 193–204.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cihlar, J. and Jansen, L.J.M., 2001. From land cover to land use: a methodology for efficient land use mapping over large areas. The Professional Geographer, 53, 275–289.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Comber, A. J., Wadsworth, R.A., and Fisher, P. F., 2008. Using semantics to clarify the conceptual confusion between land cover and land use: the example of forest. Journal of Land Use Science, 3, 185–198.
   Google Scholar
• Comber, A., Fisher, P., and Wadsworth, R., 2005. What is land cover? Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 32, 199–209.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Comber, A., Fisher, P., and Wadsworth, R., 2005a. Comparing the consistency of expert land cover knowledge. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation, 7, 189–201.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Comber, A., Fisher, P., and Wadsworth, R., 2005b. You know what land cover is but does anyone else? . . . an investigation into semantic and ontological confusion. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 26, 223–228.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Comber, A., Fisher, P., and Wadsworth, R., 2005c. Comparing statistical and semantic approaches for identifying change from land cover datasets. Journal of Environmental Management, 77, 47–55.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Di Gregorio, A. and Jansen, L.J.M., 1998. Land Cover Classification System (LCSC): Classification Concepts and User Manual. Rome: FAO.
   Google Scholar
• Eriksson, S. and Skånes, H., 2010. Addressing semantics and historical data heterogeneities in cross-temporal landscape analyses. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 139, 516–521.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Commission 1994, CORINE Land cover technical guide, Luxembourg: OPOCE.
   Google Scholar
• Feng, C.C. and Flewelling, D.M., 2004. Assessment of semantic similarity between land use/land cover classification systems. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 28, 229–246.
   Google Scholar
• Forman, R.T.T., 1995. Land mosaics: The ecology of landscapes and regions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• FOTDanmark., 2009. Specification of object types. Available from: http://www.fotdanmark.dk/Materiale/Files/FOTspecifikation/FOT4+Specification_UK [ Accessed 23 April 2013].
   Google Scholar
• Gregorio, A., 2005. Land Cover Classification System (LCCS), version 2: classification concepts and user manual. Environment and natural resources series 8. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
   Google Scholar
• Haunert, J.H. and Wolff, A., 2010. Area aggregation in map generalisation by mixed-integer programming. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 24, 1871–1897.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hermosilla, T., et al., 2012. Assessing contextual descriptive features for plot-based classification of urban areas. Landscape and Urban Planning, 106, 124–137.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herold, M., et al., 2006. Evolving standards in land cover characterization. Journal of Land Use Science, 1, 157–168.
   Google Scholar
• Jansen, L.M., et al., 2006. Analysis of the spatio-teporal and semantic aspects of land-cover/use change dynamics 1991–2001 in Albania at national and district levels. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 119, 107–136.
   Google Scholar
• Jansen, L.J.M., Groom, G., and Carrai, G., 2008. Land-cover harmonisation and semantic similarity: some methodological issues. Journal of Land Use Science, 3, 131–160.
   Google Scholar
• Jansen, L.J.M. and Veldkamp, T., 2012. Evaluation of the variation in semantic contents of class sets on modelling dynamics of land-use changes. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 26, 1–30.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kavouras, M. and Kokla, M., 2002. A method for the formalization and integration of geographical categorizations. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 16, 439–453.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kavouras, M., Kokla, M., and Tomai, E., 2005. Comparing categories among geographic ontologies. Computers & Geosciences, 31, 145–154.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levin, G., 2013. Applying parcel-specific land-use data for improved monitoring of semi-natural grassland in Denmark. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 185, 2615–2625.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levin, G., Jepsen, M.R., and Blemmer, M., 2012. BASEMAP – Technical documentation of a model for elaboration of a land-use and land-cover map for Denmark. Technical Report from DCE – Danish Centre for Environment and Energy. Aarhus University: DCE – Danish Centre for Environment and Energy. Available from: http://www2.dmu.dk/pub/tr11.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Leyk, S., Boesch, R., and Weibel, R., 2006. Saliency and semantic processing: Extracting forest cover from historical topographic maps. Pattern recognition, 39, 953–968.
   Google Scholar
• Lu, D. and Weng, Q., 2007. A survey of image classification methods and techniques for improving classification performance. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 28, 823–870.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neumann, K., et al., 2007. Comparative assessment of CORINE2000 and GLC2000: Spatial analysis of land cover data for Europe. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation, 9, 425–437.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodriguez, M.A. and Egenhofer, M.J., 2003. Determining semantic similarity among entity classes from different ontologies. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 15, 442–456.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sipkes, J., 2002. Integrated inventory and classification of vegetation on the African continent: AFRICOVER. GIM International, 16, 62–65.
   Google Scholar
• Verburg, P.H., Neumann, K., and NOL, L., 2011. Challenges in using land use and land cover data for global change studies. Global Change Biology, 17, 974–989.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar