How to improve geospatial data usability: from metadata to quality-aware GIS community
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
/ The field of Geomatics/GISciences witnessed major changes since its origins in the 1960s. If developments in this field first looked at ways to transfer and store spatial and semantic information from paper documents into computers (e.g. spatial data structures - raster vs vector; scan; topology), the focus moved later to the design of more advanced ways to store, retrieve and analyze geospatial data. The field grew exponentially and, in the last two decades, organisations started to realise that a large volume of geospatial data were produced, but mostly remained unknown from many potential users (even within a same organisation). In order to have a better Return on Investment (ROI), and to encourage an increased use, organisations and countries started to develop initiatives like Digital Libraries and Spatial Data Infrastructures. This moved the research focus from the systems themselves to data transfers and reuse issues (e.g. interoperability, metadata, ontologies, data fusion). We are nowadays entering the next phase: the widespread usage of these data by people who haven't collected or integrated them and may not have been initially targeted as primary users. With the increasing ease of access to geospatial data and with the user-friendliness of today's Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and related web-based solutions, geospatial information is more than ever reaching the hands of the general public (e.g. Google Earth, Virtual Earth). Similarly, expert users in different fields of applications have also seen their number increasing by orders of magnitudes worldwide. Digital Libraries and Spatial Data Infrastructures are now facing huge downloads. For instance, the Canadian Web portal Geobase that provides free access to geospatial data (e.g. DEM, road network), had an increase from about 210,000 downloads in 2003-2004, to about 600,000 in 2004-2005, and more than 2,200,000 downloads in 2005-2006. In addition, GIS applications are not anymore restricted to traditional land/resources-related uses but now reach most disciplines, ranging from Science/Engineering to Human/Social or Medical Sciences. Consequently, most of the new users have limited or no knowledge of the geospatial field and the underlying nature of spatial referencing (e.g. reference systems/projections, scale, generalisation, accuracy). Furthermore, it appears that problems faced by users from the general public are also emerging more often than ever before. Similarly, users having an expertise in geomatics often just cannot know the key characteristics which are necessary to assess the usefulness of the data being downloaded, nor the added uncertainty resulting from the integration of such datasets. Consequently, an increasingly important research agenda is now to make sure the level of usability of spatial data is better known for contexts that were not always planned when the data were collected. One objective is to try to reduce the risks of misuse of these data and the risks of potential accidents that could result from these misuses.
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.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
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 | 0,046 | 0,020 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,008 | 0,014 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| 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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».