A rasterized building footprint dataset for the United States.
Journal
Scientific data
ISSN: 2052-4463
Titre abrégé: Sci Data
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101640192
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
29 06 2020
29 06 2020
Historique:
received:
14
11
2019
accepted:
20
05
2020
entrez:
1
7
2020
pubmed:
1
7
2020
medline:
1
7
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Microsoft released a U.S.-wide vector building dataset in 2018. Although the vector building layers provide relatively accurate geometries, their use in large-extent geospatial analysis comes at a high computational cost. We used High-Performance Computing (HPC) to develop an algorithm that calculates six summary values for each cell in a raster representation of each U.S. state, excluding Alaska and Hawaii: (1) total footprint coverage, (2) number of unique buildings intersecting each cell, (3) number of building centroids falling inside each cell, and area of the (4) average, (5) smallest, and (6) largest area of buildings that intersect each cell. These values are represented as raster layers with 30 m cell size covering the 48 conterminous states. We also identify errors in the original building dataset. We evaluate precision and recall in the data for three large U.S. urban areas. Precision is high and comparable to results reported by Microsoft while recall is high for buildings with footprints larger than 200 m2 but lower for progressively smaller buildings.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32601298
doi: 10.1038/s41597-020-0542-3
pii: 10.1038/s41597-020-0542-3
pmc: PMC7324622
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
207Commentaires et corrections
Type : ErratumIn
Références
Bing Maps Team. Computer Generated Building Footprints for the United States. (Microsoft, 2018).
Microsoft. US Building Footprints. (Microsoft, 2018).
Yang, L. et al. A new generation of the United States National Land Cover Database: Requirements, research priorities, design, and implementation strategies. ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens 146, 108–123 (2018).
doi: 10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2018.09.006
Bertaud, A. The Spatial Organization of Cities: Deliberate Outcome or Unforeseen Consequence? (2004).
Guttenberg, A. Z. Urban Structure and Urban Growth. J. Am. Inst. Plann. 26, 104–110 (1960).
doi: 10.1080/01944366008978392
Middel, A., Häb, K., Brazel, A. J., Martin, C. A. & Guhathakurta, S. Impact of urban form and design on mid-afternoon microclimate in Phoenix Local Climate Zones. Landsc. Urban Plan 122, 16–28 (2014).
doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2013.11.004
Hamaina, R., Leduc, T. & Moreau, G. Towards Urban Fabrics Characterization Based on Buildings Footprints. In Bridging the Geographic Information Sciences: International AGILE’2012 Conference, Avignon (France), April, 24–27, 2012 (eds. Gensel, J., Josselin, D. & Vandenbroucke, D.) 327–346, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29063-3_18 , (Springer, 2012).
Heris, M. P. Evaluating metropolitan spatial development: a method for identifying settlement types and depicting growth patterns. Reg. Stud. Reg. Sci 4, 7–25 (2017).
Heris, M. P., Foks, N., Bagstad, K. J. & Troy, A. A national dataset of rasterized building footprints for the U.S. U.S. Geological Survey https://doi.org/10.5066/P9J2Y1WG (2020).
Foks, N., Heris, M. P., Bagstad, K. J. & Troy, A. A Code for Rasterizing Microsoft’s Building Footprint Dataset. U.S. Geological Survey https://doi.org/10.5066/P9XZCPMT (2020).
Microsoft. Canadian Building Footprints, https://github.com/microsoft/CanadianBuildingFootprints , (Microsoft, 2019).
Bing Maps Team. Microsoft releases 18M building footprints in Uganda and Tanzania to enable AI Assisted Mapping. Bing Blogs, https://blogs.bing.com/maps/2019-09/microsoft-releases-18M-building-footprints-in-uganda-and-tanzania-to-enable-ai-assisted-mapping/ (2019).
Gillies, S. & Others. Fiona is OGR’s neat, nimble, no-nonsense API. (Toblerity, 2011).
Gillies, S. & Others. Shapely: manipulation and analysis of geometric objects. (Toblerity, 2011).
Gillies, S. & Others. Rasterio: geospatial raster I/O for {Python} programmers. (Mapbox, 2013).
van der Walt, S., Colbert, S. C. & Varoquaux, G. The NumPy Array: A Structure for Efficient Numerical Computation. Comput. Sci. Eng. 13, 22–30 (2011).
doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2011.37
Dalcín, L., Paz, R. & Storti, M. MPI for Python. J. Parallel Distrib. Comput. 65, 1108–1115 (2005).
doi: 10.1016/j.jpdc.2005.03.010
Falgout, J. T. & Gordon, J. M. USGS Yeti Supercomputer: U.S. Geological Survey. (2017).
Saito, T. & Rehmsmeier, M. The Precision-Recall Plot Is More Informative than the ROC Plot When Evaluating Binary Classifiers on Imbalanced Datasets. Plos One 10 (2015).
City of Denver. Denver Open Data Catalog: Building Outlines (2014), https://www.denvergov.org/opendata/dataset/city-and-county-of-denver-building-outlines-2014 (2016).
City of New York. Building Footprints. NYC Open Data, https://data.cityofnewyork.us/Housing-Development/Building-Footprints/nqwf-w8eh .
Los Angeles County. Countywide Building Outlines – 2008. Los Angeles County GIS Data Portal, https://egis3.lacounty.gov/dataportal/2011/04/28/countywide-building-outlines/ (2011).
Whitehand, J. W. R. British urban morphology: the Conzenian tradition, https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/British-urban-morphology%3A-the-Conzenian-tradition-Whitehand/b9fd4ff8d85095a871183c75263de48be98e7049 (2001).
Wong, N. H. et al. Evaluation of the impact of the surrounding urban morphology on building energy consumption. Sol. Energy 85, 57–71 (2011).
doi: 10.1016/j.solener.2010.11.002
Coseo, P. & Larsen, L. How factors of land use/land cover, building configuration, and adjacent heat sources and sinks explain Urban Heat Islands in Chicago. Landsc. Urban Plan 125, 117–129 (2014).
doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.02.019
Cadenasso, M. L., Pickett, S. T. A. & Schwarz, K. Spatial heterogeneity in urban ecosystems: reconceptualizing land cover and a framework for classification. Front. Ecol. Environ. 5, 80–88 (2007).
doi: 10.1890/1540-9295(2007)5[80:SHIUER]2.0.CO;2
Vu, T. T., Yamazaki, F. & Matsuoka, M. Multi-scale solution for building extraction from LiDAR and image data. Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinformation 11, 281–289 (2009).
doi: 10.1016/j.jag.2009.03.005