MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2920599720 · doi:10.11575/prism/36156

Automating geoprocessing tasks to create city wide layers

2019· article· en· W2920599720 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePRISM (University of Calgary) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Modeling in Geospatial Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeoprocessingComputer scienceWorld Wide WebGeographyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Annually, Spatial and Numeric Data Services (SANDS) receives 434 Digital Aerial Survey (DAS) datasets, in AutoCAD format, from the City of Calgary. Each dataset covers an Alberta Township System (ATS) section (Figure 1) and is made up of five layers containing “surface features and topography” information “derived from 1:5000 aerial photos”1. University of Calgary students regularly utilize these files in their research, however, in some cases they are looking for specific features covering an area much larger than an ATS section and in a more geographic information system (GIS) friendly format. To derive city wide products, from the DAS files, required reiterating through numerous geoprocessing operations. These repetitive and time consuming tasks were automated and accomplished within a day, using Python and ArcPy, instead of weeks if executed manually. The next section details the steps that were taken to create the outputs.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.871
Threshold uncertainty score0.559

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.179 · 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