Towards Precise Metadata-set for Discovering 3D Geospatial Models in Geo-portals
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract. Accessing 3D geospatial models, eventually at no cost and for unrestricted use, is certainly an important issue as they become popular among participatory communities, consultants, and officials. Various geo-portals, mainly established for 2D resources, have tried to provide access to existing 3D resources such as digital elevation model, LIDAR or classic topographic data. Describing the content of data, metadata is a key component of data discovery in geo-portals. An inventory of seven online geo-portals and commercial catalogues shows that the metadata referring to 3D information is very different from one geo-portal to another as well as for similar 3D resources in the same geo-portal. The inventory considered 971 data resources affiliated with elevation. 51% of them were from three geo-portals running at Canadian federal and municipal levels whose metadata resources did not consider 3D model by any definition. Regarding the remaining 49% which refer to 3D models, different definition of terms and metadata were found, resulting in confusion and misinterpretation. The overall assessment of these geo-portals clearly shows that the provided metadata do not integrate specific and common information about 3D geospatial models. Accordingly, the main objective of this research is to improve 3D geospatial model discovery in geo-portals by adding a specific metadata-set. Based on the knowledge and current practices on 3D modeling, and 3D data acquisition and management, a set of metadata is proposed to increase its suitability for 3D geospatial models. This metadata-set enables the definition of genuine classes, fields, and code-lists for a 3D metadata profile. The main structure of the proposal contains 21 metadata classes. These classes are classified in three packages as General and Complementary on contextual and structural information, and Availability on the transition from storage to delivery format. The proposed metadata set is compared with Canadian Geospatial Data Infrastructure (CGDI) metadata which is an implementation of North American Profile of ISO-19115. The comparison analyzes the two metadata against three simulated scenarios about discovering needed 3D geo-spatial datasets. Considering specific metadata about 3D geospatial models, the proposed metadata-set has six additional classes on geometric dimension, level of detail, geometric modeling, topology, and appearance information. In addition classes on data acquisition, preparation, and modeling, and physical availability have been specialized for 3D geospatial models.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle