You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
NDVI, scale invariance and the modifiable areal unit problem: An assessment of vegetation in the Adelaide Parklands
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Science of the Total Environment, January 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.01.130 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hamideh Nouri, Sharolyn Anderson, Paul Sutton, Simon Beecham, Pamela Nagler, Christopher J. Jarchow, Dar A. Roberts |
| Abstract |
This research addresses the question as to whether or not the Normalised Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) is scale invariant (i.e. constant over spatial aggregation) for pure pixels of urban vegetation. It has been long recognized that there are issues related to the modifiable areal unit problem (MAUP) pertaining to indices such as NDVI and images at varying spatial resolutions. These issues are relevant to using NDVI values in spatial analyses. We compare two different methods of calculation of a mean NDVI: 1) using pixel values of NDVI within feature/object boundaries and 2) first calculating the mean red and mean near-infrared across all feature pixels and then calculating NDVI. We explore the nature and magnitude of these differences for images taken from two sensors, a 1.24m resolution WorldView-3 and a 0.1m resolution digital aerial image. We apply these methods over an urban park located in the Adelaide Parklands of South Australia. We demonstrate that the MAUP is not an issue for calculation of NDVI within a sensor for pure urban vegetation pixels. This may prove useful for future rule-based monitoring of the ecosystem functioning of green infrastructure. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 103 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 103 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 22 | 21% |
| Researcher | 14 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 14 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 12% |
| Lecturer | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 12 | 12% |
| Unknown | 24 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 21 | 20% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 18 | 17% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 12 | 12% |
| Engineering | 12 | 12% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 11 | 11% |
| Unknown | 27 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 May 2019.
All research outputs
#8,537,346
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Science of the Total Environment
#11,322
of 29,635 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#147,893
of 422,426 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science of the Total Environment
#146
of 292 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,635 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 422,426 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 292 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.