# Consistency Analysis and Accuracy Assessment of Eight Global Forest Datasets over Myanmar
## 2 Materials and Methods
### Forest Data Harmonization for Comparison and Analysis
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c} \hline \hline
**Dataset** & **Time** & **Forest Related Types and Codes** \\ \hline Hansen & 2010 & Forest \\ (treecover) & & 50: Tree cover, broadleaved, evergreen, closed to open (\textgreater{}15\%) \\  & & 60, 61, 62: Tree cover, broadleaved, deciduous, closed to open (\textgreater{}15\%) \\  & & 70, 71, 72: Tree cover, needleleaved, evergreen, closed to open (\textgreater{}15\%) \\  & & 80, 81, 82: Tree cover, needleleaved, deciduous, closed to open (\textgreater{}15\%) \\  & & 90: Tree cover, mixed leaf type (broadleaved and needleleaved) \\  & & 100: Mosaic tree and shrub (\textgreater{}50\%)/herabaceous cover (\textless{}50\%) \\  & & 106: Tree cover, flooded, fresh or braish water \\  & & 107: Tree cover, flooded, saline water \\ \hline  & & 21: Broadleaf, leaf-on \\  & & 22: Broadleaf, leaf-on \\  & & 23: Needleaf, leaf-on \\  & & 24: Needleaf, leaf-off \\  & & 25: Mixed leaf, leaf-on \\  & & 26: Mixed leaf, leaf-off \\ \cline{2-3}  & & 2017 & 2: Forest \\ \cline{2-3}  & &
\begin{tabular}{c} FROM-GLC10 \\ (2017) \\ \end{tabular} & 20: Forest \\ \hline  & & 50: Evergreen broadleaved forest \\  & & 60: Deciduous broadleaved forest \\  & & 61: Open deciduous broadleaved forest (\(0.15<\text{f}<0.4\)) \\  & & 62: Closed deciduous broadleaved forest (f\(\textless{}0.4\)) \\  & & 70: Evergreen needle-leaved forest (\(0.15<\text{f}<0.4\)) \\ GLC-FCS & 2015 & 71: Open evergreen needle-leaved forest (\(0.15<\text{f}<0.4\)) \\  & & 72: Closed evergreen needle-leaved forest (\(6<0.4\)) \\  & & 80: Deciduous needle-leaved forest \\  & & 81: Open deciduous needle-leaved forest (\(0.15<\text{f}<0.4\)) \\  & & 82: Closed deciduous needle-leaved forest (f\(\textless{}0.4\)) \\  & & 90: Mixed leaf forest (broadleaved and needle-leaved) \\ \hline  & & 51: Open evergreen broadleaved forest \\  & & 52: Closed evergreen broadleaved forest \\  & & 61: Open deciduous broadleaved forest (\(0.15<\text{f}<0.4\)) \\  & & 62: Closed deciduous broadleaved forest (\(\textless{}0.4\)) \\  & & 71: Open evergreen needle-leaved forest (\(0.15<\text{f}<0.4\)) \\  & & 72: Closed evergreen needle-leaved forest (\(0.15<\text{f}<0.4\)) \\  & & 81: Open deciduous needle-leaved forest (\(0.15<\text{f}<0.4\)) \\  & & 82: Closed deciduous needle-leaved forest (\(0.4>\text{f}<0.4\)) \\  & & 91: Open mixed leaf forest (broadleaved and needle-leaved) \\ \hline  & & 20: Forest (The land covered by trees with crown coverage of more than 30\%, including deciduous broad-leaved forest, evergreen broad-leaved forest, deciduous confierous forest, mixed forest, and sparse forest land with crown coverage of 10-30\%) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Forest classification systems from the eight datasets and the conversion table. To evaluate the spatial consistency among the eight products, we overlaid all forest cover datasets to obtain a spatial consistency distribution map. Different consistency levels were indicated by the magnitude of consistency. The consistency degree is divided into eight levels, \"8\" indicates that the eight datasets on the pixel are the same, and the pixel is judged to be a forest type. In this way, \"1\" indicates the worst consistency condition, i.e., only one dataset classifies the pixel as a forest type. In addition, to reduce the influence of the time factor, we also selected three different datasets for 2015, i.e., CCI-LC, FROM-GLC, and GLC-FCS, and performed spatial consistency analysis for these three datasets, whose consistency levels correspond to a total of three levels. To explore the spatial pattern of the disagreement and its potential causes, we further analyzed the relationship of spatial consistency with terrain and climate. The landscape forms are divided into five types according to elevation: plain (\(<\)200 m), hilly (200\(\sim\)500 m), low mountain (500\(\sim\)1000 m), medium mountain (1000\(\sim\)3500 m), and high mountain (\(>\)3500 m).