Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revision Previous revision | Last revision Both sides next revision | ||
|
patterns_of_change [2015/09/26 21:22] admin |
patterns_of_change [2015/09/27 00:56] admin |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| ====== Spatial Patterns of Changes ====== | ====== Spatial Patterns of Changes ====== | ||
| - | As Dinamica EGO was designed to be a general purpose dynamic modeling software, we present a collection of spatial patterns produced by the various combinations of its transition functions. In order to evaluate the wide range of Dinamias’s possibilities, a series of simulation were run using synthetic simplified maps. The results for each model are presented as follows: | + | As Dinamica EGO was designed to be a general purpose dynamic modeling software, we present a collection of spatial patterns produced by the various combinations of its transition functions. In order to evaluate the wide range of Dinamicas’s possibilities, a series of simulation were run using synthetic simplified maps. The results for each model are presented as follows: |
| H0 to H8 are run, for a sole time step, by using a transition matrix 2x2 that models only one transition – from class 2 to 1 – with a rate of 0.01. The landscape map encompasses a matrix of 132 by 132 cells and all cells have equivalent spatial transition probability, which means that ancillary variables are not used to influence the cell allocation process. | H0 to H8 are run, for a sole time step, by using a transition matrix 2x2 that models only one transition – from class 2 to 1 – with a rate of 0.01. The landscape map encompasses a matrix of 132 by 132 cells and all cells have equivalent spatial transition probability, which means that ancillary variables are not used to influence the cell allocation process. | ||