MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1985893093 · doi:10.3138/carto.46.2.83

Improving Web Mapping with Generalization

2011· article· en· W1985893093 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Julien Gaffuri

Bibliographic record

VenueCartographica The International Journal for Geographic Information and Geovisualization · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGeographic Information Systems Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRaster graphicsGeneralizationComputer scienceCartographic generalizationWeb mappingThe InternetServerRaster dataScale (ratio)Web serverData miningWorld Wide WebInformation retrievalArtificial intelligenceCartographyMathematicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Maps are not like other images. Internet maps could be improved through the use of automated mapping methods, particularly automated generalization techniques. Operational automated generalization systems exist, but they are not used on the Web. Integrating generalization and Web-mapping systems is an important challenge for Internet cartography; this integration requires that the architecture of existing Web-mapping systems be improved. This article gives some recommendations to progress toward this integration: spatial data servers should diffuse more vector data and fewer pre-computed raster tiles; they should be made “scale aware” and should provide multi-scale data; the generalization transformations should be shared between servers and clients; and Web-mapping clients should be able to compute dynamic graphic generalizations to adapt the spatial data display to the user's needs.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.007
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.251 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCartographica The International Journal for Geographic Information and GeovisualizationSame topicGeographic Information Systems StudiesFrench-language works237,207