Comparing estimators of gross change derived from complete coverage mapping versus statistical sampling of remotely sensed data

65 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Quantifying changes in the rates of forest clearing in Indonesia from 1990 to 2005 using remotely sensed data sets (2009, background): “Considerable debate on the appropriate use of Landsat data for regional monitoring has concerned the alternative uses of exhaustive mapping versus sampling-based approaches (Tucker and Townshend 2000, Czaplewski 2003, Stehman 2005).”
Pan-tropical monitoring of deforestation (2007, background): “The targeted sampling of change reduces the overall resources typically required in assessing biome-scale change and overcomes the problem encountered in previous studies of imprecise estimates of forest clearing attributable to the rarity of such clearing (Czaplewski 2003, Stehman 2005).”
Good practices for estimating area and assessing accuracy of land change (2014, background): “Consequently, the need to estimate p⋅k introduces uncertainty in the form of sampling variability, whereas pk⋅ is not subject to sampling variability (Stehman, 2005).”