Determining The Area of Viti-Levu Using Integration

Introduction

The purpose of this report was to determine the area of an island using integration. The principal technique used
involved fitting lines to the geographical borders of the landmass. Functions used to map lines were then
integrated between a domain in order to determine an area. In order to achieve this, graphing software was used
to accurately fit functions to borders, and to calculate the definite integrals for each function. Determined areas
use a combination of difference functions, definite integrals and arithmetic combination of sections.

Observations

- An overall percent error ≤10% to the known area is considered precise, used to evaluate the
effectiveness of method.
- All functions must have a coefficient of determination greater than 0.8 to ensure precision.
- A function that conforms to the shape of a border will be favoured to one that does not, considering it
does not have a coefficient of determination less than 0.8.
- The map used was selected due to its detailed border shape, high resolution of both the edge and the
scale bar. It is sourced from Orange Smile (2023). High resolution is important so that the conformity
of line to border can be visually assessed.
- The island Viti Levu was chosen due to its small size and simple, curved shape which resembles that of
a polynomial. Thus, integration is applicable to landmass.
- The highest order of the polynomial used is 10. This is to ensure that functions can be accurately
replicated in a secondary calculation.
- Graphing software GeoGebra is used, as it has convenient features which enable usage of definite
integrals.
- The landmass is separated into a maximum of 20 parts so that process remains practical and efficient.
Assumptions

The following assumptions have been made to define geographical areas and simplify the calculation process.

- Geographical area is defined by area of landmass above sea level.

- Features like rivers and lakes form part of the landmass.
- Borders are treated like smooth curves rather than jagged so that functions can be fit.
- The landmass is considered a static closed area, as surface area is generally variable due to changing
tide levels.
- Topography of the island is ignored when calculating area. Although it may impact the area of the
island, it is not represented by the chosen map and is unachievable using integration.
- The image is scaled to 1 square unit to 1m2. Thus, it is assumed that using a scale factor of 100 will not
affect the precision of calculated areas.
- Micro island have not been included as part of the nation’s landmass. Only the largest landmass has
been considered. This is because the resolution of those islands is not sufficient for modelling. (move to
assumptions)

Concepts and Procedures

Majority of modelling and processing was facilitated through graphing program GeoGebra. This was achieved
by overlaying a scaled image of the chosen landmass (Viti Levu) over cartesian plane. Points were mapped onto
the image in accordance with the general shape of geographical borders. The ‘FitPoly()’ program was used to fit
curves to the points on the plane. A coefficient of determination (R2) was calculated for each function to
determine its efficacy of representing point positioning. The R2 value statistically describes how well a
regression line approximates the actual data (Newcastle University, 2022). Functions used was integrated using
‘IntegrateBetween()’ to a set domain determined by range of respective points used (Eq. 1). This was
represented in GeoGebra in (Eq. 2) Difference functions are used to eliminate excess areas created by
unevenness in line conformity (Eq. 3).
 b

∫ p ( x )=a n x n +a n−1 x n−1+. … … … . …+ a2 x 2 +a1 x+ a0 dx

a

Equation 1 - General form of integrated polynomial where b and a represent domain of selected function.

Equation 2 - Function represented by GeoGebra

d ( x )=f ( x )−g ( x )
b

∫ d(x)
a

Equation 3 - Calculating area using a difference function.

Equation 4 - Integration of difference functions performed by GeoGebra

Determining Models

The following is a demonstration of the procedure used to calculate the area of specific section of the landmass.
The entire landmass with plotted points with calculated areas have been inserted in Appendix 1.

Section [k1]

This section (Fig. 1) is a simple integration of a function between a set range of points. Using GeoGebra,
points A (0, 0) to H (1.3, 2.1) were plotted. The function f(x) was integrated to the x-axis between the domain,
defined by the range of points used [ 0 ≤ x ≥1.3 ].

Figure 1 - Section [k1] with f(x) fit to the border.

The calculations used have been expressed below:

1.3

f ( x )=4.87 x −9.96 x + 6.29 x +0.05∫ f ( x )=4.87 x −9.96 x + 6.29 x +0.05 dx

3 2 3 2

¿ [ 1.22 x 4 −3.32 x 3 +3.145 x 2+ 0.05 x ] 1.3

0

[ ] [
= 1.22 ( 1.3 ) 4−3.32 ( 1.3 )3 +3.145 ( 1.3 )2+ 0.05 (1.3 ) − 1.22 ( 0 )4 −3.32 ( 0 )3+ 3.145 ( 0 )2+ 0.05 ( 0 ) ]
≈ 1.56
∴ Section [ k 1 ] has an area of 1.56 square units

Section [d2] & [i2]

The area in Section [d2] [i2] uses a difference function to determine the overall area (Fig.2). This is because
there significant non conformant part of the fist function used, and this area has been subtracted. The
calculation has been demonstrated below.

Figure 2 - Section [d2] & [i2].

[d2]

8 7 6 5
g ( x )=−0.0155229969587 x + 1.506896169729617 x −63.83712970754255 x + 1541.4283520287263 x −2
( 9.84 ≤ x ≤ 14.74 )
14.74

∫ −0.0155229969587 x 8 +1.506896169729617 x 7 −63.83712970754255 x 6 +1541.4283520287263 x 5−232

9.84

¿ [ −2036303 x 9 2865089 x 8 154156965 x 7 1645007713 x6 3868986507 x 5 13160885537 x 4 285050

+
1180617831 15210545
−
16903936
+
6403182
−
833720
+
236104
−
64
 [
9 8 7 6
−2036303(14.74) 2865089( 14.74) 154156965(14.74) 1645007713(14.74) 3868986507(14.74
¿ + − + −
1180617831 15210545 16903936 6403182 833720
-

[ −2036303( 9.84)9 2865089( 9.84)8 154156965( 9.84)7 1645007713(9.84)6 3868986507(9.84)5 131

1180617831
+
15210545
−
16903936
+
6403182
−
833720
+

¿ 24.15

[i2]

s ( x )=−12.54 x 2+ 355.59 x−2518.22 ( 13.89 ≤ x ≤14.59 )

2
h ( x )=−0.51 x +13.26 x−84.27 ( 13.89≤ x ≤ 14.59 )
d ( x )=s ( x ) −h ( x )

d ( x )=−12.54 x + 355.59 x−2518.22−(−0.51 x +13.26 x−84.27 )

2 2

d ( x )=−12.54 x 2+ 355.59 x−2518.22+ 0.51 x 2−13.26 x+ 84.27

d ( x )=−12.03 x2 +342.33 x−2433.95

14.59
¿ ∫ −12.03 x2 +342.33 x−2433.95 dx
13.89

14.59
¿ [−4.01 x +171.165 x −2433.95 x ]
3 2
13.89

¿ [−4.01 ( 14.59 ) +171.165 ( 14.59 ) −2433.95 ( 14.59 ) ]−[−4.01 (13.89 ) +171.165 ( 13.89 ) −2433.95 ( 13.89 ) ]
3 2 3 2

3 2 3 2
¿−4.01 ( 14.59 ) + 171.165 ( 14.59 ) −2433.95 ( 14.59 ) + 4.01 ( 13.89 ) −171.165 ( 13.89 ) +2433.95 ( 13.89 )
0.69

Section [n1] & [e2]

This is another difference function, and clearly demonstates the challenge posed by sections that curl
backwards.
Figure 3 - Sections [n1] & [e2]

[n1]

p ( x ) =1.69 x 3−10.44 x2 +21.79 x−11.42 (1.3 ≤ x ≤ 2.83 )

2.83

∫ 1.69 x 3−10.44 x 2+ 21.79 x−11.42 dx

1.3

2.83
¿ [ 0.4425 x −3.48 x +10.895 x −11.42 x ]
4 3 2

1.3

¿ [ 0.4425(2.83) −3.48 ( 2.83 ) +10.895 ( 2.83 ) −11.42(2.82) ]−[ 0.4425(1.3) −3.48 (1.3 ) +10.895 ( 1.3 ) −11.42
4 3 2 4 3 2

6.09
[e2]

h ( x )=−4.7 x3 +20.95 x 2−31.19 x+18.69 ( 1.42 ≤ x ≤2.02 )

3 2
g ( x )=6.03 x −29.71 x +48.48 x−23.96

d ( x )=(−4.7 x3 +20.95 x 2−31.19 x+18.69 )−( 6.03 x 3−29.71 x2 + 48.48 x−23.96 )

3
1073 x 2
¿− +2533 x 50−7967 x 100+85320
100
2.02

∫ d(x)
1.42

1073 3 2533 2 7967 853

¿−
100
∫ x dx +
50
∫ x dx−
100
∫ x dx+
20
∫ 1dx

¿ [ 400 150
−
200
+
20 1.42]
−1073 x 4 2533 x3 7967 x 2 853 x 2.02
+

0.45
∴ Total area=6.09−0.45
¿ 5.64
Result Table

Red sections indicate that 15 decimal places were used in the calculation instead of the two indicated. This was
done to obtain accurate results, the functions used were sensitive to rounding.

Section Function(s) Used & Domain Area Area 2 Coeff. Of

Det.
K1 f ( x )=4.87 x 3−9.96 x 2+ 6.29 x +0.05 1.56 “” 0.99
[ 0 ≤ x ≤1.3 ]
N1 p ( x ) =1.69 x −10.44 x2 +21.79 x−11.42 6.09
3 “” 0.95
E2 g ( x )=6.03 x −29.71 x +48.48 x−29.96 -0.45
3 2 “” 1, 0.94
[ 1.3 ≤ x ≤2.02 ]
h x =−4.7 x3 +20.95 x 2−31.19 x+18.69
( )
[ 1.42≤ x ≤ 2.02 ]
d ( x )=10.73 x 3 −50.66 x 2 +79.67 x−48.65
U1 q ( x )=−0.31 x +5.94 1.55 “” 1
[ 2.83 ≤ x ≤3.14 ]
V1 r ( x )=−0.29 x 3+ 3.12 x 2−10.29 x+ 15.48 10.88 10.84 1
[ 3.14 ≤ x ≤ 5.07 ]
W1 9.6 2929.6
s ( x )=2.53 x 4−59.43 x 3+521.16 x 2−2020.96+ 10.99 0.95
[ 5.07 ≤ x ≤6.6 ]
C2 7 6 5 20.89x 4 −9382.68
“” 3 2
f 3 ( x )=−0.07 x +3.72 x −89.31 x +1184.64 x +0.96
44376.9 x −1160603.6
[ 6.6 ≤ x ≤ 9.84 ]
D2 8 7 6
g ( x )=−0.02 x +1.51 x −63.84 x +1541 24.15
5 “”
x −23203.15 x +0.99
4 3
222967.6 x −1335693.9
[ 9.84 ≤ x ≤ 13.69 ]
I2 s1 ( x ) =−12.54 x +355.59 x−2518.22 -0.69
2 -0.99 1
0.63 (not
h3 ( x )=−0.51 x 2+13.26 x−84.77 used on
[ 13.89≤ 14.59 ] border)
C1 h2 ( x )=0.01 x −0.12 x + 0.26 x +0.44 x 8.53
5 4 3 2 9.82
−22.4 x+ 0.04 0.96
[ 0 ≤ x ≤ 4.45 ]
D1 3 2
p2 x =0.01 x −0.12 x + 0.18 x−1.82 21.25
( ) “” 0.97

E1 4 3 1.832 8.67 0.94

e 1 ( x)=0.54 x −29.62 x + 599.76 x −5326.74 x +17549.04
J1 s2 ( x ) =−0.32 x 4+ 18.36 x 3 −392.54 x2 +3720.9
-4.19 x−13197.8
“” 1
[ 12.67 ≤ x ≤15.2 ]
J2 p3 x =15.67 x −469.32 x +3512.61 0.25
( ) 2 0.55 1

Processing Data

Scale factor

The following demonstrates the scale factor used to convert the area of the landmass represented on the graph
to real-life area. The scale bar featured on the image has been scaled to fit a specific number of square unit
lengths, from which the ratio has been determined.
 So
1 su :10 km Sf =
2
Sn

102
Sf =
1
Sf =100
Determining Area

In order to determine the area, a sum of the areas were calculated and multiplied by a scale factor in order to
determine the physical area of the landmass.
b
Area=∑∫ p ( x )
a

Area=1.56+6.09−0.45+1.55+10.88+9.6+ 20.89+ 24.15−0.69+ 8.53+21.25+1.83−4.19+0.25

Area=101.25 square units

Area ( km )=101.25∗100
2

Area ( km 2 )=10125 km2

Percentage Error

In order to determine the efficacy of calculated solution (v¿ ¿ a)¿ , the value has been compared to the
expected value ( v e) (Country Reports, 2023). It measures the percent difference between the two values.

δ=
| |
v a−v e
ve
∗100

δ= |10125−10386
10386 |∗100
δ =2.51 %
Verification Using Polygon Tool

The polygon tool uses the points plotted on the map to form a polygon. The Area() function is then used to
determine an exact area of the polygon.

Area ( poly .tool )=107.96

δ= |107.96−101.25
101.25 |∗100
δ=6.63 %
Therefore, the calculated values are within acceptable range (≤10%) and the integrated area were verified as a
precise model.

Verification Using Trapezoidal Rule

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
3.6 5.6 5 7.3 6 8.6 6.6 9.7 5.9 9.3 6.6 9.8 6.8 9.4 4.9 6.74 3.98 5.68
5 5 3 3 3 1 9 6 7 2 2 1
-2 - - - - - - - -1.7
2.3 2.6 3.0 3.3 3.1 2.6 1.8
3 3 8 7 5 2 3
W
A≈ ( E+2 M )
2
1.5
A≈ ¿
2
A ≈ 108.51

δ= |108.51−101.25
101.25 |∗100
δ =7.17 %
This is below the threshold of acceptable difference (10%); thus the integration method is considered reliable.

Reasonableness of Solution

The value provided by integration is considered reasonable, as it provided a value similar to that provided by
verification methods.

Evaluation

Strengths

The percent error is less than 10%, thus the methods employed are considered accurate and effective.
Functions used all conformed to border shape, and had a coefficient of determination greater than 0.8,
suggesting precise curve fitting.

The use of integration to determine area enables the use of more complex, uneven shapes. It is a precise
method, unlike the approximate value of area provided by the trapezoidal rule. The functions and integrated
can be reproduced on a calculator.

Using GeoGebra provides a versatile visual interface on which the suitability of regression models can be
assessed. Minor modifications can be easily applied.

Limitations

Integrated area works on the assumption that the area is contained within simple curved lines. However, the
borders are neither simple nor curved but jagged. Thus, error is inherent in calculation regardless of map
resolution and number of functions used.

The software used, GeoGebra, retains all decimal places when determining a model, but expresses the position
of points and functions to two decimal places. This is the primary reason that a difference exists between the
GeoGebra calculated areas and the separately calculated areas. Thus, the functions that have been

Functions cannot be accurately integrated to the x-axis if the shape curves to the left. An instance of this
appears in points H to P. A difference function must be used, which requires guessing the boundaries of size
missed by other functions. This introduces inaccuracy to the method.

The accepted size includes micro islands that are not attached to the large landmass. This accounts for why the
calculated land size is smaller than the accepted value.

Improvements

The accuracy of area calculations can be increased by using more points. This allows for the generation of
models that have greater conformation to the border. Thus, excess or missed areas will be reduced during
 integration. This is best accompanied by a greater number of sections, as functions perform better over smaller
distances. A greater number of sections will eliminate the presence of large non-conformant areas. An average
of areas can also be calculated according to the resultant area on different maps of the same landmass.

A greater map resolution is also necessary to effectively apply regression line to the borders. In future, a map
should be sourced from scientific source which contains all minor landmasses.

A higher order polynomial function can be used to curve-fit the map, given that it provides greater conformity
to the border. The scale factor can be reduced so that the map is 1:1 to the actual size of the island. This would
reduce error introduced by imprecisions in setting the scale to the gridline on the cartesian plane.

Conclusion

The results obtained demonstrate that integration of regression models is an effective method of determining
area. The accuracy of the results was considered satisfactory in reference to the accepted value. The solution
was also verified using the polygon tool, and an estimation using the trapezoidal rule. However, the curve fitting
method introduces inaccuracy when determining areas of shapes that curve back along the x-axis. Resolution of
the map prevented micro islands from being considered, which added to difference in calculated and actual
areas.

A use of more points and higher order polynomial functions is recommended to increase the precision of line
conformity. A higher resolution map can also be used to integrate areas of micro islands.

Country Reports. (2023). Fiji Geography. Retrieved from Country Reports:

https://www.countryreports.org/country/Fiji/geography.htm

Newcastle University. (2022). Coeffecient of Determination, R-Squared. Retrieved from Newcastle

University: https://www.ncl.ac.uk/webtemplate/ask-assets/external/maths-resources/
statistics/regression-and-correlation/coefficient-of-determination-r-squared.html

Orange Smile. (2023). Viti Levu Island. Retrieved from Orange Smile.

References

Appendix
Figure 4 - Viti Levu with points mapped and areas determined.