Abstract

Coverage of nominal 95% confidence intervals of a proportion estimated from a sample obtained under a complex survey design, or a proportion estimated from a ratio of two random variables, can depart significantly from its target. Effective calibration methods exist for intervals for a proportion derived from a single binary study variable, but not for estimates of thematic classification accuracy. To promote a calibration of confidence intervals within the context of land-cover mapping, this study first illustrates a common problem of under and over-coverage with standard confidence intervals, and then proposes a simple and fast calibration that more often than not will improve coverage. The demonstration is with simulated sampling from a classified map with four classes, and a reference class known for every unit in a population of 160,000 units arranged in a square array. The simulations include four common probability sampling designs for accuracy assessment, and three sample sizes. Statistically significant over- and under-coverage was present in estimates of user’s (UA) and producer’s accuracy (PA) as well as in estimates of class area proportion. A calibration with Bayes intervals for UA and PA was most efficient with smaller sample sizes and two cluster sampling designs.

Highlights

  • Accuracy assessment is an important step in any land cover mapping project (Congalton, 2001; Stehman & Foody, 2019)

  • The demonstration is with simulated sampling from a classified map with four classes, and a reference class known for every unit in a population of 160,000 units arranged in a square array

  • On average over the 2000 replications, the estimate of Overall accuracy (OA) was for all designs and sample sizes within 0.3% from the true value of 0.81 (Table 1)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Accuracy assessment is an important step in any land cover mapping project (Congalton, 2001; Stehman & Foody, 2019). Regardless, to be objective, free of bias, and independent of the classification process, it is important that accuracy statistics are derived from a sample of units obtained under a probability sampling design (Stehman, 1999). The sample inclusion probabilities are used as weights to obtain design-consistent estimators of accuracy and their variances (Cochran, 1977)

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call