Comparasion of NDBI and NDVI as Indicators of Surface Urban Heat Island Effect in Landsat 8 Imagery: A Case Study of Iasi

This study compares the normalized difference built-up index (NDBI) and normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) as indicators of surface urban heat island effects in Landsat-8 OLI imagery by investigating the relationships between the land surface temperature (LST), NDBI and NDVI. The urban heat island (UHI) represents the phenomenon of higher atmospheric and surface temperatures occurring in urban area or metropolitan area than in the surrounding rural areas due to urbanization. With the development of remote sensing technology, it has become an important approach to urban heat island research. Landsat data were used to estimate the LST, NDBI and NDVI from four seasons for Iasi municipality area. This paper indicates than there is a strong linear relationship between LST and NDBI, whereas the relationship between LST and NDVI varies by season. This paper suggests, NDBI is an accurate indicator of surface UHI effects and can be used as a complementary metric to the traditionally applied NDVI

Determining the Optimum Number of Ground Control Points for Obtaining High Precision Results Based on UAS Images

Ground control points (GCPs) are used in the process of indirectly georeferencing Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) images. A minimum of three ground control points (GCPs) is required but increasing the number of GCPs will lead to higher accuracy of the final results. The aim of this study is to provide the answer to the question of how many ground control points are necessary in order to derive high precision results. To obtain the results, an area of about 1 ha was photographed with a low-cost UAS, namely, the DJI Phantom 3 Standard at two different heights, 28 m and 35 m above ground, the camera being oriented in a nadiral position, and 50 ground control points were measured using a total station. In the first and the second scenario, the UAS images were processed using the Pix4D Mapper Pro software and 3DF Zephyr, respectively, by performing a full bundle adjustment process with the number being gradually increased from three GCPs to 40. The third test was made with 3DF Zephyr Pro software using a free-network approach in the bundle adjustment. Also, the point clouds and the mesh surfaces derived automatically after using the minimum and the optimum number of GCPs, respectively, were compared with a terrestrial laser scanner (TLS) point cloud. The results expressed a clear overview of the number of GCPs needed for the indirect georeferencing process with minimum influence on the final results

Rivaroxaban with or without aspirin in stable cardiovascular disease

BACKGROUND: We evaluated whether rivaroxaban alone or in combination with aspirin would be more effective than aspirin alone for secondary cardiovascular prevention. METHODS: In this double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 27,395 participants with stable atherosclerotic vascular disease to receive rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) plus aspirin (100 mg once daily), rivaroxaban (5 mg twice daily), or aspirin (100 mg once daily). The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, stroke, or myocardial infarction. The study was stopped for superiority of the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group after a mean follow-up of 23 months. RESULTS: The primary outcome occurred in fewer patients in the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group than in the aspirin-alone group (379 patients [4.1%] vs. 496 patients [5.4%]; hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66 to 0.86; P<0.001; z=−4.126), but major bleeding events occurred in more patients in the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group (288 patients [3.1%] vs. 170 patients [1.9%]; hazard ratio, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.40 to 2.05; P<0.001). There was no significant difference in intracranial or fatal bleeding between these two groups. There were 313 deaths (3.4%) in the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group as compared with 378 (4.1%) in the aspirin-alone group (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.96; P=0.01; threshold P value for significance, 0.0025). The primary outcome did not occur in significantly fewer patients in the rivaroxaban-alone group than in the aspirin-alone group, but major bleeding events occurred in more patients in the rivaroxaban-alone group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with stable atherosclerotic vascular disease, those assigned to rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) plus aspirin had better cardiovascular outcomes and more major bleeding events than those assigned to aspirin alone. Rivaroxaban (5 mg twice daily) alone did not result in better cardiovascular outcomes than aspirin alone and resulted in more major bleeding events