• Title/Summary/Keyword: 아메바 기법

Search Result 2, Processing Time 0.017 seconds

A GIS-Based Method for Delineating Spatial Clusters: A Modified AMOEBA Technique (공간 클러스터의 범역 설정을 위한 GIS-기반 방법론 연구 -수정 AMOEBA 기법-)

  • Lee, Sang-Il;Cho, Dae-Heon;Sohn, Hak-Gi;Chae, Mi-Ok
    • Journal of the Korean Geographical Society
    • /
    • v.45 no.4
    • /
    • pp.502-520
    • /
    • 2010
  • The main objective of the paper is to develop a GIS-based method for delineating spatial clusters. Major tasks are: (i) to devise a sustainable algorithm with reference to various methods developed in the fields of geographic boundary analysis and cluster detection; (ii) to develop a GIS-based program to implement the algorithm. The main results are as follows. First, it is recognized that the AMOEBA technique utilizing LISA is the best candidate. Second, a modified version of the AMOEBA technique is proposed and implemented in a GIS environment. Third, the validity and usefulness of the modified AMOEBA algorithm is assured by its applications to test and real data sets.

A Study on the Application of the AMOEBA Technique for Delineating the Unique Primary Zones for the DIF Zoning Regulation (기반시설부담구역제도 제1단계 유일범역 도출과정에서의 AMOEBA 기법 적용에 관한 모의실험 연구)

  • Lee, Seok-Jun;Choei, Nae-Young
    • Journal of Cadastre & Land InformatiX
    • /
    • v.47 no.2
    • /
    • pp.5-18
    • /
    • 2017
  • The AMOEBA approach in this study supplements the Hotspot method that had not been fully capable of dealing with the ecotone issues in designating the Development Impact Fee (DIF) zones as had been seen in the preceding study by Kim and Choei (2017). The AMOEBA procedure shares the common Getis-Ord statistic with the Hotspot technique but is more adequate to figure out the ecotones. For the comparative purpose, simulations are run by both methods for a series of different scenarios in terms of analytic spatial units (here, the square grids) from 100m up to 400m; and the zonal outcomes by both methods are compared using a set of evaluative indicators. In terms of the numerical scores, the performances by the two methods are much comparable except that the former is slightly superior with respect to the avoidance of the oversized spread of the selected zones whereas so is the latter with respect to the ease of infrastructure installation. It remains yet to be investigated by the extended studies that include in-depth field surveys to figure out the causes as well as the meanings of such differences in zonal determinations.