Issues in Replication and Stability of Least-cost Path Calculations

Q1 Arts and Humanities
I. Herzog
{"title":"Issues in Replication and Stability of Least-cost Path Calculations","authors":"I. Herzog","doi":"10.14434/sdh.v5i2.33796","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"An important and frequently used tool in archaeological spatial analysis is least-cost path (LCP) analysis to compute routes connecting a set of targets. The outcome depends on the cost model chosen and the topographic data used. A slope-dependent cost model requires a digital elevation model (DEM) that should reflect the landscape in the past. It is often impossible to reconstruct the past terrain, and modern high-resolution elevation data results in problematic storage requirements and computation times. This article presents a case study that explores issues in replication and stability of LCP calculations for pairs of targets that are close to known old trade routes. A large number of cost models is tested based on two topographic data sets, including DEMs of two different resolutions (25 m and 50 m). The cost models use six different slope-dependent cost functions suggested by various authors for pedestrian movement. Moreover, a slope-dependent cost function is applied that results in LCPs including hairpin curves if the slope exceeds a predefined critical value. It is shown that the best-performing LCP sets for the two topographic data sets are closely related but not identical. Moreover, reasons for the failure of LCP reconstructions for some old route sections are discussed.","PeriodicalId":52934,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Digital Heritage","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in Digital Heritage","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14434/sdh.v5i2.33796","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

An important and frequently used tool in archaeological spatial analysis is least-cost path (LCP) analysis to compute routes connecting a set of targets. The outcome depends on the cost model chosen and the topographic data used. A slope-dependent cost model requires a digital elevation model (DEM) that should reflect the landscape in the past. It is often impossible to reconstruct the past terrain, and modern high-resolution elevation data results in problematic storage requirements and computation times. This article presents a case study that explores issues in replication and stability of LCP calculations for pairs of targets that are close to known old trade routes. A large number of cost models is tested based on two topographic data sets, including DEMs of two different resolutions (25 m and 50 m). The cost models use six different slope-dependent cost functions suggested by various authors for pedestrian movement. Moreover, a slope-dependent cost function is applied that results in LCPs including hairpin curves if the slope exceeds a predefined critical value. It is shown that the best-performing LCP sets for the two topographic data sets are closely related but not identical. Moreover, reasons for the failure of LCP reconstructions for some old route sections are discussed.
最小代价路径计算中的复制和稳定性问题
考古空间分析中一个重要且常用的工具是最小成本路径(LCP)分析,用于计算连接一组目标的路线。结果取决于所选择的成本模型和所使用的地形数据。与坡度相关的成本模型需要一个数字高程模型(DEM),该模型应反映过去的景观。重建过去的地形通常是不可能的,而现代高分辨率高程数据会导致存储需求和计算时间出现问题。本文介绍了一个案例研究,探讨了靠近已知旧贸易路线的成对目标的LCP计算的复制和稳定性问题。基于两个地形数据集测试了大量成本模型,包括两种不同分辨率(25米和50米)的DEM。成本模型使用了不同作者提出的六种不同的与坡度相关的行人运动成本函数。此外,如果斜率超过预定义的临界值,则应用与斜率相关的成本函数,该函数会导致LCP包括发夹曲线。结果表明,两个地形数据集的性能最好的LCP集密切相关,但并不完全相同。此外,还讨论了一些旧线路段无导线心脏起搏器重建失败的原因。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Studies in Digital Heritage
Studies in Digital Heritage Arts and Humanities-Classics
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
2
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书