Paper detail

Comparisons of five indices for estimating local terrain surface roughness using LiDAR point clouds

Terrain surface roughness is an abstract concept, and its quantitative description is often vague. As such, there are various roughness indices used in the literature, the selection of which is often challenging in applications. This study compared the terrain surface roughness maps quantified by five commonly used roughness indices, and explored their correlations for four terrain surfaces of distinct surface complexities. These surfaces were represented by digital elevation models (DEMs) constructed using airborne LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) data. The results of this study reveal the similarity in the global patterns of the local surface roughness maps derived, and the distinctions in their local patterns. The latter suggests the importance of considering multiple indices in the studies where local roughness values are the critical inputs to subsequent analyses.

preprint2023arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Authors

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.