The objective of this paper is to examine the applicability of three geosta
tistical approaches, ordinary kriging (OK); kriging with a trend model (KT)
, and indicator kriging (IK), to the assessment of uncertainty in estimates
. This paper uses the OK and KT standard error and the conditional standard
error of the conditional cumulative distribution function (ccdf) derived t
hrough IK to assess uncertainty in estimates of elevation. The mean OK and
KT standard error and mean IK standard error, using data sampled from a rem
otely sensed digital terrain model (DTM), were used to ascertain the uncert
ainty in estimates. The estimates of elevation were assessed with reference
to the complete DTM. Judgement on the success of the three approaches was
made on the basis of the difference between the standard error of estimates
and the mean kriging standard error. The mean OK and KT standard errors re
present the standard error of estimation more accurately than the mean IK s
tandard error, and OK (or KT) estimates of elevation values were more accur
ate than those for II(. Furthermore, IK may be significantly more costly to
implement than OK (or KT) in terms of expenditure of time and effort. Also
, the implementation of IK was demonstrated to be problematic in the presen
ce of a low-frequency trend. A modified form of IK was also employed whereb
y the thresholds for estimation of the ccdfs were adapted locally in the ba
sis of the available observations. This approach markedly reduced the probl
ems encountered with IK employing fixed (global) thresholds. IK with locall
y adaptive indicator thresholds provided a more accurate guide to uncertain
ty on a local basis than OK or KT. It is suggested that IK recommended for
the assessment of uncertainty in estimates locally where the estimation of
accuracy of a specified will need to be implemented with a trend model to f
urther improve results. (C) 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.