Scribd Logo
Importer

Bienvenue sur Scribd !

  • Verhagen, P., BRUGHMANS, T., Nuninger, L. and Bertoncello, F. (2012) The long and winding road: combining least cost paths and network analysis techniques for settlement location analysis and predictive modelling. At CAA 2012, University of Southampton, 29 March 2012.

    Transféré par

    tom.brughmans8209
    68 vues15 pages
    When thinking about socio-cultural factors influencing settlement location choice, the accessibility of places in the landscape is a potentially important variable to take into account. How to define accessibility in such a way that it might be used as a variable that can be used for analysis is however still very much open to debate. Most published research considering landscape accessibility limits it to the ease with which humans can reach a certain location. So-called hiking equations are often applied to obtain cost surfaces of accessibility at the level of the individual pixel, and accumulative cost surfaces are then applied to find the travel time or energy expenditure needed to reach a single destination from all points in the area studied. By adding up these accumulated cost surfaces for each and every pixel, a map of differential accessibility of the landscape can be obtained (total path costs; Llobera 2000), a concept similar to the creation of Shimbel-matrices in network analysis (probability landscapes in network models?). This accessibility can also be analyzed for different travel times (short/medium/long distance). However, these methods do not provide much information on the possible foci of movement in the landscape. We argue that to this purpose some additional steps are needed. We depart from the creation of multiple least cost paths from and to random locations (Verhagen in press). This will result in structures of least cost paths that resemble networks with different weights attached to the edges, but that do not have any real ‘nodes’, similar to the kind of structures that are analysed in space syntax or other forms of spatial network analysis. We can then assume that edges with a high weight will have been most attractive to travel, and thus may have been more attractive to settlement as well. However, the presence of settlement itself must undoubtedly have influenced travel intensity, and a combination of landscape based accessibility and network analysis techniques would seem necessary to get a grip of their combined influence. An exploratory network analysis was therefore performed to examine a range of structural features of the junctions in the landscape that were identified by the least cost paths. The relative prominence of these nodes as indicated through different network measures was then compared with their relative position to features in the landscape and with their relative position on the least cost paths. Unfortunately, satisfying software solutions to combine the raster-GIS cost surface techniques with node-and-edge-based network analysis software are missing at the moment. In this paper we want to present an exploration into possible solutions, and show some examples of what might be done by combining both analysis techniques, focusing on settlement location analysis and predictive modelling. References LLOBERA, M., 2000. Understanding movement: a pilot model towards the sociology of movement In Lock, G. (ed.) Beyond the Map. Archaeology and Spatial Technologies, pp: 65-84. IOS Press/Ohmsha, Amsterdam. VERHAGEN, P., in press. On the road to nowhere? Least cost paths, accessibility and the predictive modelling perspective. Proceedings of CAA2010, Granada.

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Formats disponibles

    PPTX, PDF, TXT ou lisez en ligne sur Scribd

    Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

    Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

    Signaler ce document
    When thinking about socio-cultural factors influencing settlement location choice, the accessibility of places in the landscape is a potentially important variable to take into account. How to define accessibility in such a way that it might be used as a variable that can be used for analysis is however still very much open to debate. Most published research considering landscape accessibility limits it to the ease with which humans can reach a certain location. So-called hiking equations are often applied to obtain cost surfaces of accessibility at the level of the individual pixel, and accumulative cost surfaces are then applied to find the travel time or energy expenditure needed to reach a single destination from all points in the area studied. By adding up these accumulated cost surfaces for each and every pixel, a map of differential accessibility of the landscape can be obtained (total path costs; Llobera 2000), a concept similar to the creation of Shimbel-matrices in network analysis (probability landscapes in network models?). This accessibility can also be analyzed for different travel times (short/medium/long distance). However, these methods do not provide much information on the possible foci of movement in the landscape. We argue that to this purpose some additional steps are needed. We depart from the creation of multiple least cost paths from and to random locations (Verhagen in press). This will result in structures of least cost paths that resemble networks with different weights attached to the edges, but that do not have any real ‘nodes’, similar to the kind of structures that are analysed in space syntax or other forms of spatial network analysis. We can then assume that edges with a high weight will have been most attractive to travel, and thus may have been more attractive to settlement as well. However, the presence of settlement itself must undoubtedly have influenced travel intensity, and a combination of landscape based accessibility and network analysis techniques would seem necessary to get a grip of their combined influence. An exploratory network analysis was therefore performed to examine a range of structural features of the junctions in the landscape that were identified by the least cost paths. The relative prominence of these nodes as indicated through different network measures was then compared with their relative position to features in the landscape and with their relative position on the least cost paths. Unfortunately, satisfying software solutions to combine the raster-GIS cost surface techniques with node-and-edge-based network analysis software are missing at the moment. In this paper we want to present an exploration into possible solutions, and show some examples of what might be done by combining both analysis techniques, focusing on settlement location analysis and predictive modelling. References LLOBERA, M., 2000. Understanding movement: a pilot model towards the sociology of movement In Lock, G. (ed.) Beyond the Map. Archaeology and Spatial Technologies, pp: 65-84. IOS Press/Ohmsha, Amsterdam. VERHAGEN, P., in press. On the road to nowhere? Least cost paths, accessibility and the predictive modelling perspective. Proceedings of CAA2010, Granada.

    Droits d'auteur :

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Téléchargez comme PPTX, PDF, TXT ou lisez en ligne sur Scribd
    Signaler comme contenu inapproprié
    68 vues15 pages

    Verhagen, P., BRUGHMANS, T., Nuninger, L. and Bertoncello, F. (2012) The long and winding road: combining least cost paths and network analysis techniques for settlement location analysis and predictive modelling. At CAA 2012, University of Southampton, 29 March 2012.

    Transféré par

    tom.brughmans8209
    When thinking about socio-cultural factors influencing settlement location choice, the accessibility of places in the landscape is a potentially important variable to take into account. How to define accessibility in such a way that it might be used as a variable that can be used for analysis is however still very much open to debate. Most published research considering landscape accessibility limits it to the ease with which humans can reach a certain location. So-called hiking equations are often applied to obtain cost surfaces of accessibility at the level of the individual pixel, and accumulative cost surfaces are then applied to find the travel time or energy expenditure needed to reach a single destination from all points in the area studied. By adding up these accumulated cost surfaces for each and every pixel, a map of differential accessibility of the landscape can be obtained (total path costs; Llobera 2000), a concept similar to the creation of Shimbel-matrices in network analysis (probability landscapes in network models?). This accessibility can also be analyzed for different travel times (short/medium/long distance). However, these methods do not provide much information on the possible foci of movement in the landscape. We argue that to this purpose some additional steps are needed. We depart from the creation of multiple least cost paths from and to random locations (Verhagen in press). This will result in structures of least cost paths that resemble networks with different weights attached to the edges, but that do not have any real ‘nodes’, similar to the kind of structures that are analysed in space syntax or other forms of spatial network analysis. We can then assume that edges with a high weight will have been most attractive to travel, and thus may have been more attractive to settlement as well. However, the presence of settlement itself must undoubtedly have influenced travel intensity, and a combination of landscape based accessibility and network analysis techniques would seem necessary to get a grip of their combined influence. An exploratory network analysis was therefore performed to examine a range of structural features of the junctions in the landscape that were identified by the least cost paths. The relative prominence of these nodes as indicated through different network measures was then compared with their relative position to features in the landscape and with their relative position on the least cost paths. Unfortunately, satisfying software solutions to combine the raster-GIS cost surface techniques with node-and-edge-based network analysis software are missing at the moment. In this paper we want to present an exploration into possible solutions, and show some examples of what might be done by combining both analysis techniques, focusing on settlement location analysis and predictive modelling. References LLOBERA, M., 2000. Understanding movement: a pilot model towards the sociology of movement In Lock, G. (ed.) Beyond the Map. Archaeology and Spatial Technologies, pp: 65-84. IOS Press/Ohmsha, Amsterdam. VERHAGEN, P., in press. On the road to nowhere? Least cost paths, accessibility and the predictive modelling perspective. Proceedings of CAA2010, Granada.

    Droits d'auteur :

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Téléchargez comme PPTX, PDF, TXT ou lisez en ligne sur Scribd
    Signaler comme contenu inapproprié
    sur 15

    CAA2012 Southampton, UK 26-30 March 2012

    Philip Verhagen VU University Amsterdam (NL) Tom Brughmans University of Southampton (UK) Laure Nuninger CNRS, UMR6249, Besanon (F)

    Frdrique Bertoncello CNRS, UMR6130, Nice (F)

    PHC Van Gogh 2010/2011 - Introducing the human (f)actor in predictive modelling for archaeology
    Frans-Nederlandse Academie / Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (NWO) Ministres des Affaires trangres et europennes (MAEE) / Enseignement suprieur et de la Recherche (MESR).

    predictive modelling mainly based on environmental factors socio-cultural factors too difficult to integrate?
    accessibility is a potential factor to include, but how to define it?

    Llobera (2000) introduced the concept of scale-dependent accessibility


    modification of Shimbel or all-node distance matrix provides the minimal distance between each node of a network

    relative distances determined using cost surfaces


    time-consuming calculations for larger areas

    interest: determine areas where local and regional accessibility are opposed
    predicting the possible location of fords and passes, or defendible

    positions in the landscape understanding why certain portions of the landscape are not occupied

    least cost path calculations usually applied to determine routes between known locations
    exception: Whitley and Burns (2008)

    paths calculated within a certain radius from a randomly or systematically selected sample of starting points
    creates multiple cost paths for a region at various scale levels no preferred start or end points

    cost distances calculated from starting point


    paths tracked back from a sufficiently large number of points at a

    specific distance repeat and overlay for each starting point

    + + + + + + + + + +

    + + + + + + + + + +

    + + + + + + + + + +

    + + + + + + + + + +

    + + + + + + + + + +

    + + + + + + + + + +

    + + + + + + + + + +

    + + + + + + + + + +

    cumulative cost paths resemble networks that have


    weighted edges non-directed edges a large number of nodes

    few hubs (nodes with lots of connections)

    can network analysis techniques say something more about the structure?
    e.g. identify corridors and bottlenecks

    node-based global measures


    average degree, heterogeneity, clustering coefficient

    local measures
    closeness and betweenness centrality

    import/export from ArcGIS through .dbf


    needs from-node, to-node and coordinates of nodes

    open source software

    based on space syntax concepts


    calculates local (edge-based) measures
    choice (=betweenness)
    both topological and metric depth topological/metric radius can be defined im- and export from ArcGIS through MIF/MID-format

    freeware (UCL)

    cumulative cost path based networks contain a lot of noise, need post-processing to extract the general structure
    for this exercise:
    select 10% and 20% most frequently chosen paths simplify network structure (expand linear raster features

    with 2 cells) and thin it convert to polyline

    cumulative cost path based networks are not typical


    few hubs, weakly structured general structure only apparent when selecting the most frequently

    chosen paths

    some network analysis measures can be interesting for better understanding potential foci of movement in the landscape
    in particular betweenness (choice) and control

    analysis very sensitive to edge effects

    node-based network analysis packages


    do not include metric depth cannot calculate measures over various scales

    space syntax does


    but gives no information on the nodes cannot include relative distances (costs)

    how to interpret the results in archaeological terms?

    Vous aimerez peut-être aussi