SlideShare a Scribd company logo
International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development
Kathmandu, Nepal
Accuracy assessment, key
concerns and improve
procedures involved in NLCMS
Kabir Uddin
Kabir.Uddin@icimod.org
Validation of Nepal land cover map
What is the
accuracy of
the results
Have you done
validation
Most common questions from the remote sensing expert about results
Background
The accuracy of image classification is
highly important to the monitoring and
investigation of national level land cover
mapping. During the image
classification many mixed pixels are
located in between different classes, the
accuracy of edge pixels tend to be
lower than that of interior pixels. This
scenario leads to the increment of
heterogeneity to the classification
accuracy of each class and to the
increase of uncertainty of accuracy
assessment.
 Nepal land cover validation process
helped us to assess how well the
classification carried for Nepal land
cover mapping.
 Understand how to interpretation
using was the usefulness
Validation of developed land cover: sample collection
 4 km interval 55358 assessment plot generated for Nepal
Forest Grassland
Other wooded area Cropland Waterbodies Riverbed
Glacier
Snow
Built-up area
Baresoil
Validation of developed land cover
45173 number of quality point collected or used against of land cover classes
796 addition point collected for riverbed, built-up, waterbodies, grassland, and baresoil
 Availability of 2011 high resolution images
 Shadow and cloud on the 2011 high resolution images
 Variation of snowing area
Land cover map of Nepal
Year Forest area (%) OWL (%) Total (%)
2018 40.40 04.11 44.52
2015 40.32 03.61 43.94
2011 39.83 03.14 42.97
2010 39.59 03.06 42.66
2000 39.79 03.18 42.97
Forest area (%)
OWL (%)
Total (%)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
2000 2010 2011 2015 2018
Accuracy assessment of Nepal land cover
ERROR MATRIX for all classes of 2011 land cover
Overall Classification
Accuracy (2011) = 79.20%
Overall Kappa
Statistics = 0.7018
Class name
Waterbodies
Glacier
Snow
Forest
Riverbed
Built-up
area
Cropland
Baresoil
Barerock
Grassland
OWA
Total
Waterbodies 181 0 0 2 11 0 5 0 0 0 2 201
Glacier 0 1516 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1524
Snow 0 3 2686 0 0 0 8 0 263 0 1 2961
Forest 1 0 0 18996 0 6 558 0 0 0 266 19827
Riverbed 46 0 2 12 337 4 209 12 1 1 4 628
Built-up area 0 0 0 0 0 263 21 0 0 0 1 285
Cropland 3 0 0 839 3 498 10754 0 0 6 406 12509
Baresoil 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Barerock 0 0 855 6 0 0 0 0 935 0 4 1800
Grassland 5 0 240 858 3 25 587 0 7 147 951 2823
OWA 0 0 0 2360 0 1 447 0 0 2 591 3401
Total 236 1519 3791 23073 354 797 12589 12 1206 156 2226 45969
Class name
Producers
Accuracy
Users
Accuracy
Waterbodies 76.69% 90.05%
Glacier 99.74% 99.48%
Snow 70.85% 90.71%
Forest 82.33% 95.81%
Riverbed 92.84% 53.66%
Built-up area 33.00% 92.28%
Cropland 85.42% 85.97%
Baresoil --- ---
Barerock 77.53% 51.94%
Grassland 94.23% 5.21%
OWA 26.55% 17.38%
IPCC classes of 2011 land cover
Land cover map of Nepal
Accuracy assessment of Nepal land cover
ERROR MATRIX for IPCC classes of 2011 land cover
Overall Classification
Accuracy (2011) = 87.70%
Overall Kappa
Statistics = 0.8033
Class_Name
Wetlands
Other
land
Cropland
Forest
land
Grassland
Settlements
Total
Wetlands 575 14 216 22 1 4 832
Other land 0 6275 8 12 0 0 6295
Cropland 6 0 10716 1223 6 499 12450
Forest land 1 0 1070 22341 2 10 23424
Grassland 8 240 560 1700 147 24 2679
Settlements 0 0 19 1 0 260 280
Total 590 6529 12589 25299 156 797 45969
Class name
Reference
Totals
Classified
Totals
Number
Correct
Producers
Accuracy
Users
Accuracy
Wetlands 599 832 575 95.99% 69.11%
Other land 6529 6295 6275 96.11% 99.68%
Cropland 12589 12450 10716 85.12% 86.07%
Forest land 25299 23424 22341 88.31% 95.38%
Grassland 156 2679 147 94.23% 5.49%
Settlements 797 280 260 32.62% 92.86%
Total 45969 45969 40314
Wetlands 0.6870
Other land 0.9963
Cropland 0.8082
Forest land 0.8972
Grassland 0.0517
Settlements 0.9273
KAPPA (K^) STATISTICS
Overall Kappa Statistics = 0.8033
Conditional Kappa for each Category.
Key concerns and improvements
Key concerns and improvements
Key concerns and improvements
Key concerns and improvements
Training and validation sample collection
Key concerns and improvements
Understanding of ground reality
Key concerns and improvements
Understanding of ground reality
Key concerns and improvements
Understanding of ground reality
Key concerns and improvements
Understanding of ground reality
Key concerns and improvements
Understanding of ground reality
Utilization of annual normalized built-
up index
Thank you
More details

More Related Content

PPTX
Development of National Land Cover Monitoring System for Nepal
PDF
IRJET- Accuracy Assessment of Land use Land Cover Classifiaction using Erda’s...
PDF
Paper id 71201910
PDF
IRJET- Use of Landsat ETM+ Data for Delineation of Vegetation Cover Area in A...
PDF
seyed armin hashemi
PPTX
ArcGIS ppt.pptx
PDF
Land cover map of Nepal.pdf
PDF
IRJET- Land Cover Index Classification using Satellite Images with Different ...
Development of National Land Cover Monitoring System for Nepal
IRJET- Accuracy Assessment of Land use Land Cover Classifiaction using Erda’s...
Paper id 71201910
IRJET- Use of Landsat ETM+ Data for Delineation of Vegetation Cover Area in A...
seyed armin hashemi
ArcGIS ppt.pptx
Land cover map of Nepal.pdf
IRJET- Land Cover Index Classification using Satellite Images with Different ...

Similar to Accuracy assessment, key concerns and improve procedures involved in NLCMS (6)

DOCX
Research paper
PDF
1. mohammed aslam, b. mahalingam
PDF
A comparison of Land Cover Change in Kaski District, Nepal
PPS
Use of remote sensing for land cover monitoring servir science applications
PDF
Accuracy Assessment of Land Use/Land Cover Classification using multi tempora...
PDF
Land useandlandcoveranalysisofjharkhand
Research paper
1. mohammed aslam, b. mahalingam
A comparison of Land Cover Change in Kaski District, Nepal
Use of remote sensing for land cover monitoring servir science applications
Accuracy Assessment of Land Use/Land Cover Classification using multi tempora...
Land useandlandcoveranalysisofjharkhand
Ad

More from Kabir Uddin (7)

PPTX
Regional Land Cover Monitoring System - Hindu Kush Himalaya
PPT
Accuracy assessment of land cover
PPTX
Band Combination of Landsat 8 Earth-observing Satellite Images
PPT
Image Analysis using Definiens Professional 4
PPT
Image classification and land cover mapping
PPT
Introduce variable/ Indices using landsat image
PPTX
Object Based Image Analysis
Regional Land Cover Monitoring System - Hindu Kush Himalaya
Accuracy assessment of land cover
Band Combination of Landsat 8 Earth-observing Satellite Images
Image Analysis using Definiens Professional 4
Image classification and land cover mapping
Introduce variable/ Indices using landsat image
Object Based Image Analysis
Ad

Recently uploaded (20)

DOCX
Double Membrane Roofs for Bio-gas Tanks Reliable containment for biofuel gas....
PPTX
Afro-Asia Literature.pptxmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
PPTX
Plant_Cell_Presentation.pptx.com learning purpose
DOCX
Epoxy Coated Steel Bolted Tanks for Dairy Farm Water Ensures Clean Water for ...
PPTX
"One Earth Celebrating World Environment Day"
PDF
Bai bao Minh chứng sk2-DBTrong-003757.pdf
DOCX
Epoxy Coated Steel Bolted Tanks for Agricultural Waste Biogas Digesters Turns...
PDF
1748933543SJA_41_2_826-834 SJA Ihsan ullha.pdf
PPTX
Conformity-and-Deviance module 7 ucsp grade 12
PPTX
Corporate Social Responsibility & Governance
PPTX
Green Modern Sustainable Living Nature Presentation_20250226_230231_0000.pptx
PDF
2-Reqerwsrhfdfsfgtdrttddjdiuiversion 2.pdf
PPTX
Unit 1 - Environmental management, politics and.pptx
PPTX
Biodiversity.udfnfndrijfreniufrnsiufnriufrenfuiernfuire
PDF
Global Natural Disasters in H1 2025 by Beinsure
PPTX
Biodiversity of nature in environmental studies.pptx
PPTX
sustainable-development in tech-ppt[1].pptx
DOCX
Epoxy Coated Steel Bolted Tanks for Farm Digesters Supports On-Farm Organic W...
PPT
Environmental pollution for educational study
PDF
FMM Slides For OSH Management Requirement
Double Membrane Roofs for Bio-gas Tanks Reliable containment for biofuel gas....
Afro-Asia Literature.pptxmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Plant_Cell_Presentation.pptx.com learning purpose
Epoxy Coated Steel Bolted Tanks for Dairy Farm Water Ensures Clean Water for ...
"One Earth Celebrating World Environment Day"
Bai bao Minh chứng sk2-DBTrong-003757.pdf
Epoxy Coated Steel Bolted Tanks for Agricultural Waste Biogas Digesters Turns...
1748933543SJA_41_2_826-834 SJA Ihsan ullha.pdf
Conformity-and-Deviance module 7 ucsp grade 12
Corporate Social Responsibility & Governance
Green Modern Sustainable Living Nature Presentation_20250226_230231_0000.pptx
2-Reqerwsrhfdfsfgtdrttddjdiuiversion 2.pdf
Unit 1 - Environmental management, politics and.pptx
Biodiversity.udfnfndrijfreniufrnsiufnriufrenfuiernfuire
Global Natural Disasters in H1 2025 by Beinsure
Biodiversity of nature in environmental studies.pptx
sustainable-development in tech-ppt[1].pptx
Epoxy Coated Steel Bolted Tanks for Farm Digesters Supports On-Farm Organic W...
Environmental pollution for educational study
FMM Slides For OSH Management Requirement

Accuracy assessment, key concerns and improve procedures involved in NLCMS

  • 1. International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development Kathmandu, Nepal Accuracy assessment, key concerns and improve procedures involved in NLCMS Kabir Uddin Kabir.Uddin@icimod.org
  • 2. Validation of Nepal land cover map What is the accuracy of the results Have you done validation Most common questions from the remote sensing expert about results Background The accuracy of image classification is highly important to the monitoring and investigation of national level land cover mapping. During the image classification many mixed pixels are located in between different classes, the accuracy of edge pixels tend to be lower than that of interior pixels. This scenario leads to the increment of heterogeneity to the classification accuracy of each class and to the increase of uncertainty of accuracy assessment.  Nepal land cover validation process helped us to assess how well the classification carried for Nepal land cover mapping.  Understand how to interpretation using was the usefulness
  • 3. Validation of developed land cover: sample collection  4 km interval 55358 assessment plot generated for Nepal Forest Grassland Other wooded area Cropland Waterbodies Riverbed Glacier Snow Built-up area Baresoil
  • 4. Validation of developed land cover 45173 number of quality point collected or used against of land cover classes 796 addition point collected for riverbed, built-up, waterbodies, grassland, and baresoil  Availability of 2011 high resolution images  Shadow and cloud on the 2011 high resolution images  Variation of snowing area
  • 5. Land cover map of Nepal Year Forest area (%) OWL (%) Total (%) 2018 40.40 04.11 44.52 2015 40.32 03.61 43.94 2011 39.83 03.14 42.97 2010 39.59 03.06 42.66 2000 39.79 03.18 42.97 Forest area (%) OWL (%) Total (%) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 2000 2010 2011 2015 2018
  • 6. Accuracy assessment of Nepal land cover ERROR MATRIX for all classes of 2011 land cover Overall Classification Accuracy (2011) = 79.20% Overall Kappa Statistics = 0.7018 Class name Waterbodies Glacier Snow Forest Riverbed Built-up area Cropland Baresoil Barerock Grassland OWA Total Waterbodies 181 0 0 2 11 0 5 0 0 0 2 201 Glacier 0 1516 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1524 Snow 0 3 2686 0 0 0 8 0 263 0 1 2961 Forest 1 0 0 18996 0 6 558 0 0 0 266 19827 Riverbed 46 0 2 12 337 4 209 12 1 1 4 628 Built-up area 0 0 0 0 0 263 21 0 0 0 1 285 Cropland 3 0 0 839 3 498 10754 0 0 6 406 12509 Baresoil 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Barerock 0 0 855 6 0 0 0 0 935 0 4 1800 Grassland 5 0 240 858 3 25 587 0 7 147 951 2823 OWA 0 0 0 2360 0 1 447 0 0 2 591 3401 Total 236 1519 3791 23073 354 797 12589 12 1206 156 2226 45969 Class name Producers Accuracy Users Accuracy Waterbodies 76.69% 90.05% Glacier 99.74% 99.48% Snow 70.85% 90.71% Forest 82.33% 95.81% Riverbed 92.84% 53.66% Built-up area 33.00% 92.28% Cropland 85.42% 85.97% Baresoil --- --- Barerock 77.53% 51.94% Grassland 94.23% 5.21% OWA 26.55% 17.38%
  • 7. IPCC classes of 2011 land cover Land cover map of Nepal
  • 8. Accuracy assessment of Nepal land cover ERROR MATRIX for IPCC classes of 2011 land cover Overall Classification Accuracy (2011) = 87.70% Overall Kappa Statistics = 0.8033 Class_Name Wetlands Other land Cropland Forest land Grassland Settlements Total Wetlands 575 14 216 22 1 4 832 Other land 0 6275 8 12 0 0 6295 Cropland 6 0 10716 1223 6 499 12450 Forest land 1 0 1070 22341 2 10 23424 Grassland 8 240 560 1700 147 24 2679 Settlements 0 0 19 1 0 260 280 Total 590 6529 12589 25299 156 797 45969 Class name Reference Totals Classified Totals Number Correct Producers Accuracy Users Accuracy Wetlands 599 832 575 95.99% 69.11% Other land 6529 6295 6275 96.11% 99.68% Cropland 12589 12450 10716 85.12% 86.07% Forest land 25299 23424 22341 88.31% 95.38% Grassland 156 2679 147 94.23% 5.49% Settlements 797 280 260 32.62% 92.86% Total 45969 45969 40314 Wetlands 0.6870 Other land 0.9963 Cropland 0.8082 Forest land 0.8972 Grassland 0.0517 Settlements 0.9273 KAPPA (K^) STATISTICS Overall Kappa Statistics = 0.8033 Conditional Kappa for each Category.
  • 9. Key concerns and improvements
  • 10. Key concerns and improvements
  • 11. Key concerns and improvements
  • 12. Key concerns and improvements Training and validation sample collection
  • 13. Key concerns and improvements Understanding of ground reality
  • 14. Key concerns and improvements Understanding of ground reality
  • 15. Key concerns and improvements Understanding of ground reality
  • 16. Key concerns and improvements Understanding of ground reality
  • 17. Key concerns and improvements Understanding of ground reality Utilization of annual normalized built- up index