Application and Assessment of a CA-ANN Model for Land Use Change Simulation and Multi-Temporal Prediction in Guiyang City, China
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Overview of the Study Area
2.2. Data Sources and Processing
2.2.1. Data
2.2.2. Data Pre-Processing
2.2.3. Parameter Preparation for LU/LC Simulation
2.3. Description of the CA-ANN Model
2.4. ANN Framework Construction
2.5. Factor Correlation Analysis
2.6. Land Use Change Simulation Based on ANN
3. Results
3.1. Analysis of LULC Patterns in Guiyang from 2007 to 2022
3.2. Simulation and Analysis of Future LULC Patterns
3.3. Accuracy Assessment
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Shimrah, T.; Lungleng, P.; Devi, A.R.; Sarma, K.; Varah, F.; Khuman, Y.S. Spatio-temporal assessment on land use and land cover (LULC) and forest fragmentation in shifting agroecosystem landscape in Ukhrul district of Manipur, Northeast India. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2022, 194, 14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hussain, S.; Mubeen, M.; Karuppannan, S. Land use and land cover (LULC) change analysis using TM, ETM+ and OLI Landsat images in district of Okara, Punjab, Pakistan. Phys. Chem. Earth Parts A/B/C 2022, 126, 103117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yomo, M.; Yalo, E.N.; Gnazou, M.D.T.; Silliman, S.; Larbi, I.; Mourad, K.A. Forecasting land use and land cover dynamics using combined remote sensing, machine learning algorithm and local perception in the Agoènyivé Plateau, Togo. Remote Sens. Appl. Soc. Environ. 2023, 30, 100928. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, Y.; Sun, J.; Lu, Y.; Shu, Z. Grassland changes and the role of elevation: A global perspective. Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 2025, 57, e03391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- He, Y.; Liu, X.; Wu, D.; Li, S.; Zhou, P. Ecological Risks and Patterns Associated with Land Use/Cover Changes Along the Belt and Road Initiative Routes. Land Degrad. Dev. 2025, 36, 2075–2094. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nedd, R.; Light, K.; Owens, M.; James, N.; Johnson, E.; Anandhi, A. A Synthesis of Land Use/Land Cover Studies: Definitions, Classification Systems, Meta-Studies, Challenges and Knowledge Gaps on a Global Landscape. Land 2021, 10, 994. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Roman-Cuesta, R.M.; Elzen, M.D.; Araujo-Gutierrez, Z.; Forsell, N.; Lamb, W.F.; McGlynn, E.; Melo, J.; Rossi, S.; Meinshausen, M.; Federici, S.; et al. Land remains a blind spot in tracking progress under the Paris Agreement due to lack of data comparability. Commun. Earth Environ. 2025, 6, 598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qiu, L.; Xue, Q.; Wu, Y.; Zhang, X.; Alexandrov, G.; Wang, Y.; Yang, K.; Zhao, F.; Yin, X. Responses of precipitation and water vapor budget on the Chinese Loess Plateau to global land cover change forcing. J. Environ. Manag. 2024, 365, 121588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barati, A.A.; Zhoolideh, M.; Azadi, H.; Lee, J.H.; Scheffran, J. Interactions of land-use cover and climate change at global level: How to mitigate the environmental risks and warming effects. Ecol. Indic. 2023, 146, 109829. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khalid, W.; Shamim, S.K.; Ahmad, A. Synergistic approach for land use and land cover dynamics prediction in Uttarakhand using cellular automata and Artificial neural network. Geomatica 2024, 76, 100017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mishra, K.; Tiwari, H.L.; Poonia, V. An integrated approach of machine learning methods coupled with cellular automation for monitoring and forecasting of land use and land cover. J. Arid. Environ. 2025, 226, 105293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mahar, G.; Ahmed, R.; Iqbal, M. Temporal change assessment of agricultural land by Satellite Remote Sensing (SRS) technique. Nat. Sci. 2013, 5, 689–694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Al-Taei, A.I.; Alesheikh, A.A.; Boloorani, A.D. Land Use/Land Cover Change Analysis Using Multi-Temporal Remote Sensing Data: A Case Study of Tigris and Euphrates Rivers Basin. Land 2023, 12, 1101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Matyukira, C.; Mhangara, P. Land Cover and Landscape Structural Changes Using Extreme Gradient Boosting Random Forest and Fragmentation Analysis. Remote Sens. 2023, 15, 5520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Georganos, S.; Grippa, T.; Vanhuysse, S.; Lennert, M.; Shimoni, M.; Wolff, E. Very High Resolution Object-Based Land Use–Land Cover Urban Classification Using Extreme Gradient Boosting. IEEE Geosci. Remote Sens. Lett. 2018, 15, 607–611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tikuye, B.G.; Rusnak, M.; Manjunatha, B.R.; Jose, J. Land Use and Land Cover Change Detection Using the Random Forest Approach: The Case of the Upper Blue Nile River Basin, Ethiopia. Glob. Chall. 2023, 7, 2300155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tempa, K.; Ilunga, M.; Agarwal, A.; Tashi. Utilizing Sentinel-2 Satellite Imagery for LULC and NDVI Change Dynamics for Gelephu, Bhutan. Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 1578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Singh, S.K.; Mustak, S.; Srivastava, P.K.; Szabó, S.; Islam, T. Predicting Spatial and Decadal LULC Changes Through Cellular Automata Markov Chain Models Using Earth Observation Datasets and Geo-information. Environ. Process. 2015, 2, 61–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abdullah, A.Y.M.; Masrur, A.; Adnan, M.S.G.; Baky, M.A.A.; Hassan, Q.K.; Dewan, A. Spatio-Temporal Patterns of Land Use/Land Cover Change in the Heterogeneous Coastal Region of Bangladesh between 1990 and 2017. Remote Sens. 2019, 11, 790. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Adnan, M.S.G.; Abdullah, A.Y.M.; Dewan, A. The effects of changing land use and flood hazard on poverty in coastal Bangladesh. Land Use Policy 2020, 99, 104868. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Panda, L.K.C.; Singh, R.M.; Singh, S.K. Advanced CMD predictor screening approach coupled with cellular automata-artificial neural network algorithm for efficient land use-land cover change prediction. J. Clean. Prod. 2024, 449, 141822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, Z.; Peng, S.; Ma, D.; Shi, S.; Zhu, Z.; Zhu, J.; Gong, L.; Huang, B. Patterns of change, driving forces and future simulation of LULC in the Fuxian Lake Basin based on the IM-RF-Markov-PLUS framework. Sustain. Futures 2024, 8, 100289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mahendra, H.N.; Pushpalatha, V.; Mallikarjunaswamy, S.; Subramoniam, S.R.; Rao, A.S.; Sharmila, N. LULC change detection analysis of Chamarajanagar district, Karnataka state, India using CNN-based deep learning method. Adv. Space Res. 2024, 74, 6384–6408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xiong, J.; Yue, W.; Xia, H.; Wang, T.; Liu, Y.; Pijanowski, B.C. Will China’s territorial spatial planning policies enhance land use sustainability? An integrated assessment under global environmental change. Resour. Environ. Sustain. 2025, 21, 100228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Agapie, A.; Andreica, A.; Giuclea, M. Probabilistic cellular automata. J. Comput. Biol. 2014, 21, 699–708. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liao, J.F.; Tang, L.N.; Wang, C.P.; Xu, T. Measuring and calibrating extended neighborhood effect of urban cellular automata model based on particle swarm optimization. Prog. Geogr. 2014, 33, 1624–1633. [Google Scholar]
- Liu, Y.; Batty, M.; Wang, S.; Corcoran, J. Modelling urban change with cellular automata: Contemporary issues and future research directions. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 2021, 45, 3–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rumelhart, D.; Hinton, G.; Williams, R. Learning representations by back-propagating errors. Nature 1986, 323, 533–536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sugishita, N.; Kinjo, K.; Ohkubo, J. Extraction of nonlinearity in neural networks with Koopman operator. J. Stat. Mech. 2024, 2024, 073401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dhamge, N.R.; Atmapoojya, S.L.; Kadu, M.S. Genetic Algorithm Driven ANN Model for Runoff Estimation. Procedia Technol. 2012, 6, 501–508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gharaibeh, A.; Shaamala, A.; Obeidat, R.; Al-Kofahi, S. Improving land-use change modeling by integrating ANN with Cellular Automata-Markov Chain model. Heliyon 2020, 6, e05092. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, J.; Huang, X. The 30 m annual land cover dataset and its dynamics in China from 1990 to 2019. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 2021, 13, 3907–3925. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gao, C.; Cheng, D.; Iqbal, J.; Yao, S. Spatiotemporal Change Analysis and Prediction of the Great Yellow River Region (GYRR) Land Cover and the Relationship Analysis with Mountain Hazards. Land 2023, 12, 340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mas, J.F.; Kolb, M.; Paegelow, M.; Olmedo, M.T.C.; Houet, T. Inductive pattern-based land use/cover change models: A comparison of four software packages. Environ. Model. Softw. 2014, 51, 94–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pijanowski, B.C.; Brown, D.G.; Shellito, B.A.; Manik, G.A. Using neural networks and GIS to forecast land use changes: A Land Transformation Model. Comput. Environ. Urban Syst. 2002, 26, 553–575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baig, M.F.; Mustafa, M.R.U.; Baig, I.; Takaijudin, H.B.; Zeshan, M.T. Assessment of Land Use Land Cover Changes and Future Predictions Using CA-ANN Simulation for Selangor, Malaysia. Water 2022, 14, 402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mkrtchian, A.; Svidzinska, D. Quantifying landscape changes through land cover transition potential analysis and modeling (on the example of the Black Tisza river basin). In Proceedings of the 17th International Symposium on Landscape Ecology, Nitra, Slovakia, 27–29 May 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Rahman, M.T.U.; Tabassum, F.; Rasheduzzaman, M.; Saba, H.; Sarkar, L.; Ferdous, J.; Uddin, S.Z.; Islam, A.Z.M.Z. Temporal dynamics of land use/land cover change and its prediction using CA-ANN model for southwestern coastal Bangladesh. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2017, 189, 565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kamusoko, C.; Aniya, M.; Adi, B.; Manjoro, M. Rural sustainability under threat in Zimbabwe—Simulation of future land use/cover changes in the Bindura district based on the Markov-cellular automata model. Appl. Geogr. 2009, 29, 435–447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tsotsos, J.; Luo, J. Probing the Effect of Selection Bias on Generalization: A Thought Experiment. Res. Sq. 2021. preprints. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hu, S.; Fan, Y.; Zhang, T. Assessing the Effect of Land Use Change on Surface Runoff in a Rapidly Urbanized City: A Case Study of the Central Area of Beijing. Land 2020, 9, 17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Miao, P.; Li, C.; Xia, B.; Zhao, X.; Wu, Y.; Zhang, C.; Wu, J.; Cheng, F.; Pu, J.; Huang, P.; et al. Incorporating Ecosystem Service Trade-Offs and Synergies with Ecological Sensitivity to Delineate Ecological Functional Zones: A Case Study in the Sichuan-Yunnan Ecological Buffer Area, China. Land 2024, 13, 1503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]







| S.No. | Criteria | Source | Year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | LULC | https://zenodo.org/records/12779975 (accessed on 1 May 2025) | 2007 |
| 2 | LULC | https://zenodo.org/records/12779975 (accessed on 1 May 2025) | 2012 |
| 3 | LULC | https://zenodo.org/records/12779975 (accessed on 1 May 2025) | 2017 |
| 4 | LULC | https://zenodo.org/records/12779975 (accessed on 1 May 2025) | 2022 |
| Data | Criteria | LULC Simulation | Description | Source | Year |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DEM | Elevation | Conditioning Parameters | ASTERM DEM | https://www.gscloud.cn (accessed on 1 May 2025) | 2013 |
| Slope | Conditioning Parameters | ASTERM DEM | |||
| Aspect | Conditioning Parameters | ASTERM DEM | |||
| LULC | Distance from built-up area | Conditioning Parameters | LULC | https://zenodo.org/records/12779975 (accessed on 1 May 2025) | 2007, 2012, 2017, 2022 |
| Distance from forest | Conditioning Parameters | LULC | 2007, 2012, 2017, 2022 | ||
| Distance from water bodies | Conditioning Parameters | LULC | 2007, 2012, 2017, 2022 | ||
| Transport Network | Distance from Transport Network | Conditioning Parameters | Major and Minor roads | https://www.openstreetmap.cn (accessed on 1 May 2025) | 2009, 2014, 2019, 2024 |
| Population | Population | Conditioning Parameters | Grid-wise Population data | http://www.resdc.cn (accessed on 1 May 2025) | 2005, 2010, 2015, 2019 |
| GDP | GDP | Conditioning Parameters | Grid-wise GDP data | http://www.resdc.cn (accessed on 1 May 2025) | 2005, 2010, 2015, 2019 |
| State shape file | State boundary | Conditioning Parameters | State boundary of GUIYANG | https://www.ngcc.cn (accessed on 1 May 2025) | 2017 |
| Model | Overall Accuracy (%) | Kappa Coefficient | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Logistic Regression (LR) | 78.5 | 0.68 | Preliminary test on 2017–2022 data |
| Weight of Evidence (WoE) | 80.1 | 0.71 | Preliminary test on 2017–2022 data |
| Multi-Criteria Evaluation (MCE) | 79.3 | 0.69 | Preliminary test on 2017–2022 data |
| Artificial Neural Network (ANN) | 84.4 | 0.73 | Preliminary test on 2017–2022 data |
| Parameter (m) | Dist_to_Water_2017 (m) | Dist_to_Forest_2017 (m) | Dist_to_Built_2017 (m) | Elevation | Aspect | Slope | GDP_2015 (10 k CNY/km2) | Dist_to_Road_2019 (m) | Population_2015 (Persons/km2) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dist_to_Water_2017 (m) | 1.000 | −0.168 | 0.252 | 0.131 | −0.003 | 0.064 | −0.090 | −0.013 | −0.040 |
| Dist_to_Forest_2017 (m) | −0.168 | 1.000 | −0.343 | 0.002 | −0.023 | −0.297 | 0.185 | −0.021 | 0.188 |
| Dist_to_Built_2017 (m) | 0.252 | −0.343 | 1.000 | −0.085 | −0.008 | 0.235 | −0.186 | 0.450 | −0.184 |
| Elevation (m) | 0.131 | 0.002 | −0.085 | 1.000 | 0.006 | −0.106 | −0.028 | −0.188 | −0.029 |
| Aspect | −0.003 | −0.023 | −0.008 | 0.006 | 1.000 | 0.029 | 0.004 | −0.002 | 0.005 |
| Slope | 0.064 | −0.297 | 0.235 | −0.106 | 0.029 | 1.000 | −0.052 | 0.189 | −0.031 |
| GDP_2015 (10 k CNY/km2) | −0.090 | 0.185 | −0.186 | −0.028 | 0.004 | −0.052 | 1.000 | −0.164 | 0.997 |
| Dist_to_Road_2019 (m) | −0.013 | −0.021 | 0.450 | −0.188 | −0.002 | 0.189 | −0.164 | 1.000 | −0.145 |
| Population_2015 (persons/km2) | −0.040 | 0.188 | −0.184 | −0.029 | 0.005 | −0.031 | 0.997 | −0.145 | 1.000 |
| No. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0.862565498 | 0.093516824 | 0.004744498 | 0.019211323 | 0.001150499 | 0.000091739 | 0.018719618 |
| 2 | 0.088781634 | 0.903793423 | 0.004464021 | 0.001439911 | 0.00105406 | 0.000000249 | 0.000466702 |
| 3 | 0.333395761 | 0.309510591 | 0.345896848 | 0.010501181 | 0.000086952 | 0 | 0.000046821 |
| 4 | 0.318574766 | 0.046240442 | 0.011979609 | 0.484664401 | 0.006499575 | 0.002548853 | 0.129492353 |
| 5 | 0.039903096 | 0.032146102 | 0.000349414 | 0.005858511 | 0.915290363 | 0.000058236 | 0.006394279 |
| 6 | 0.090803922 | 0.009803922 | 0 | 0.343137255 | 0.009803922 | 0.294117647 | 0.245098039 |
| 7 | 0.080053604 | 0.00124787 | 0.000010851 | 0.013352214 | 0.001237019 | 0.000070532 | 0.904027909 |
| 2007 | 2012 | 2017 | 2022 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LULC | Area (km2) | Area (%) | Area (km2) | Area (%) | Area (km2) | Area (%) | Area (km2) | Area (%) |
| Cropland | 4042.61 | 50.32% | 3954.7 | 49.23% | 3819.62 | 47.55% | 3643.15 | 45.35% |
| Forest | 3550.81 | 44.20% | 3617.85 | 45.03% | 3687.39 | 45.90% | 3872.5 | 48.20% |
| Shrub | 187.67 | 2.34% | 134.68 | 1.68% | 82.49 | 1.03% | 42.12 | 0.52% |
| Grassland | 55.96 | 0.70% | 84.8 | 1.06% | 126.34 | 1.57% | 124.92 | 1.56% |
| Water | 73.86 | 0.92% | 78.42 | 0.98% | 79.81 | 0.99% | 76.59 | 0.95% |
| Barren | 0.1 | 0.00% | 0.09 | 0.00% | 0.62 | 0.01% | 1.78 | 0.02% |
| Impervious | 122.41 | 1.52% | 162.88 | 2.03% | 237.15 | 2.95% | 272.36 | 3.39% |
| 2007–2012 | 2012–2017 | 2017–2022 | 2007–2022 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LULC | Area Changes (km2) | Area Changes (%) | Area Changes (km2) | Area Changes (%) | Area Changes (km2) | Area Changes (%) | Area Changes (km2) | Area Changes (%) |
| Cropland | −87.91 | −2.17% | −135.08 | −3.42% | −176.47 | −4.62% | −399.46 | −9.88% |
| Forest | 67.04 | 1.89% | 69.54 | 1.92% | 185.11 | 5.02% | 321.69 | 9.06% |
| Shrub | −52.99 | −28.24% | −52.19 | −38.75% | −40.37 | −48.94% | −145.55 | −77.56% |
| Grassland | 28.84 | 51.54% | 41.54 | 48.99% | −1.42 | −1.12% | 68.96 | 123.23% |
| Water | 4.56 | 6.17% | 1.39 | 1.77% | −3.22 | −4.03% | 2.73 | 3.70% |
| Barren | −0.01 | −10.00% | 0.53 | 588.89% | 1.16 | 187.10% | 1.68 | 1680.00% |
| Impervious | 40.47 | 33.06% | 74.27 | 45.60% | 35.21 | 14.85% | 149.95 | 122.50% |
| 2022 | 2022 (Prediction) | 2027 (Prediction) | 2032 (Prediction) | 2037 (Prediction) | 2042 (Prediction) | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LULC | Area Changes (km2) | Area Changes (%) | Area Changes (km2) | Area Changes (%) | Area Changes (km2) | Area Changes (%) | Area Changes (km2) | Area Changes (%) | Area Changes (km2) | Area Changes (%) | Area Changes (km2) | Area Changes (%) |
| Cropland | 3643.15 | 45.35% | 3847.18 | 48.34% | 3703.07 | 46.04% | 3675.89 | 45.70% | 3668.76 | 45.61% | 3689.77 | 45.87% |
| Forest | 3872.5 | 48.20% | 3690.74 | 45.90% | 3869.28 | 48.10% | 3872.28 | 48.14% | 3876.28 | 48.19% | 3876.21 | 48.19% |
| Shrub | 52.12 | 0.52% | 50.64 | 0.59% | 27.67 | 0.34% | 17.67 | 0.22% | 17.67 | 0.22% | 10.75 | 0.13% |
| Grassland | 124.92 | 1.56% | 97.39 | 1.10% | 75.93 | 0.94% | 81.39 | 1.01% | 91.77 | 1.14% | 58.48 | 0.73% |
| Water | 76.59 | 0.95% | 77.69 | 0.97% | 75.75 | 0.94% | 75.76 | 0.94% | 75.76 | 0.94% | 74.22 | 0.92% |
| Barren | 1.78 | 0.02% | 0.62 | 0.01% | 0.79 | 0.01% | 1.07 | 0.01% | 1.47 | 0.02% | 1.20 | 0.01% |
| Impervious | 272.39 | 3.39% | 279.19 | 3.09% | 290.96 | 3.62% | 319.39 | 3.97% | 311.74 | 3.88% | 332.82 | 4.14% |
| Total | 8043.45 | 100.00% | 8043.45 | 100.00% | 8043.45 | 100.00% | 8043.45 | 100.00% | 8043.45 | 100.00% | 8043.45 | 100.00% |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2026 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license.
Share and Cite
Hu, L.; Duan, X.; Liu, J. Application and Assessment of a CA-ANN Model for Land Use Change Simulation and Multi-Temporal Prediction in Guiyang City, China. Sustainability 2026, 18, 1518. https://doi.org/10.3390/su18031518
Hu L, Duan X, Liu J. Application and Assessment of a CA-ANN Model for Land Use Change Simulation and Multi-Temporal Prediction in Guiyang City, China. Sustainability. 2026; 18(3):1518. https://doi.org/10.3390/su18031518
Chicago/Turabian StyleHu, Lanjun, Xiaoqi Duan, and Jianhao Liu. 2026. "Application and Assessment of a CA-ANN Model for Land Use Change Simulation and Multi-Temporal Prediction in Guiyang City, China" Sustainability 18, no. 3: 1518. https://doi.org/10.3390/su18031518
APA StyleHu, L., Duan, X., & Liu, J. (2026). Application and Assessment of a CA-ANN Model for Land Use Change Simulation and Multi-Temporal Prediction in Guiyang City, China. Sustainability, 18(3), 1518. https://doi.org/10.3390/su18031518

