*. $
+ x S e x,
… M
: P
E 4 2 : A
~~
Comme rcial| Other
CI HousinglOther
Othe rfConmercial 4 N
ME Comm iol Commercial Kr Ww bs €
Hous hg| Commercial S 4
CIOthe PIE S
EZ] Comme cial] Housing
2 Hous ng| Housing 0 23:20 4 hm
Figure 4. Cross-classification map of large | small
neighbourhood size for 250m resolution
$
5
=
5
:
5
©
o
4
o
Radius (km)
a —e— commercial for small n. = commercial for large n
—4- housing for small n --. housing for large n
1.8 ; 14
7 4751 1.35 N
p | £
5 -
É 1.3 $
=
8 1.25 5
S E
= ô
5 12 $
? 115 2
E a
a 14
3 s
8 1.05 €
u
1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Radius (km)
—e— commercial for small n. = commercial for large n.
x -- housing for large n.
—a— housing for small n.
Figure 5. Spatial metrics plots for small and large
neighbourhood size for 250m resolution a. Class area; b. Fractal
dimension
6. REFERENCES
Alberti, M., Waddell, P., 2000. An integrated urban
development and ecological simulation model. /ntegrated
assessment \(3), pp. 215-227.
International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, Vol XXXV
90
Allen, P. M., 1997. Cities and regions as evolutionary, complex
systems. Geographical Systems, 4, pp. 103-130
Barnsley, M. J., Barr, S. L., 1997. Distinguishing urban land-
use categories in fine spatial resolution land-cover data using a
graph-based, structural pattern recognition system. Computers,
Environment and Urban Systems 21(3-4), pp. 209-225.
Barredo, J. |, Kasanko, M., McCormick, N., Lavalle, C., 2003.
Modelling dynamic spatial processes: simulation of urban future
scenarios through cellular automata. Landscape and Urban
Planning 64(3), pp. 145-160.
Batty, M., Longley, P., 1994. Fractal cities : a geometry of form
and function. Academic Press: London ; San Diego
Batty, M., 1998. Urban evaluation on the desktop: simulation
with the use of extended cellular automata. Environment and
Planning A 30, pp. 1943-1967.
Chen, Q., Mynett, A. E. 2003. Effects of cell size and
configuration in cellular automata based prey-predator
modelling. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory 11(7-8),
pp. 609-625.
Childress, W. M., Rykiel, E. J., Forsythe, W., Li, B. L., Wu, H.
I.. 1996. Transition rule complexity in grid-based automata
models. Landscape Ecology, 11(5), pp. 257-266.
Clarke, K, 2003. The limits of simplicity: toward
geocomputational honesty in urban modeling, Proceedings of
the 7th International Conference on Geocomputation,
Southampton, UK
Clarke, K., Gaydos, L.J. 1998. Loose-coupling a cellular
automaton model and GIS: long-term urban growth prediction
for San Francisco and Washington/Baltimore. International
Journal of Geographical Information Science 12(7), pp. 699-
714.
Cohen, J., 1960. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales.
Educational and Psychological Measurement 20, pp. 37-46:
Congalton R. G., and Mead, R. A., 1983. A Quantitative
method to test for consistency and correctness in photo
interpretation. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote
Sensing 49, pp. 69 - 74.
Crosetto, M., Tarantola, S., Saltelli, A., 2000. Sensitivity and
uncertainty analysis in spatial modelling based on GIS.
Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 81(1), pp. 71-79.
Elkie, P. C., Rempel, R. S.. Carr, A. P., 1999. Patch Analyst
Users Manual: A tool for quantifying landscape structure.
http:/www2.uah.es/jvl/pa, manual.pdf (accessed 22 Mar. 2004)
Herold, M., Goldstein, N. C., Clarke, 'K. C., 2003. The
spatiotemporal form of urban growth: measurement, analysis
and modeling. Remote Sensing of Environment 86(3), pp. 286-
302.
Herold, M., Scepan, J., Clarke, K.C., 2002. The use of remote
sensing and landscape metrics to describe structures and
changes in urban land uses. Environment and Planning A 34(8),
pp. 1443-1458.
. Part B4. Istanbul 2004
