MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3005359275 · doi:10.3390/ijgi9020095

Geospatial Data Management Research: Progress and Future Directions

2020· article· en· W3005359275 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Modeling in Geospatial Applications
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityUniversity of Calgary
FundersDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftDeutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst
KeywordsGeospatial analysisMilestoneData scienceData managementComputer scienceGeospatial PDFGeographic information systemVisualizationData visualizationSpatial data infrastructureGeospatial metadataSpatial analysisDatabaseData miningGeographyWorld Wide WebMetadataRemote sensingMeta Data ServicesCartographyData element

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Without geospatial data management, today’s challenges in big data applications such as earth observation, geographic information system/building information modeling (GIS/BIM) integration, and 3D/4D city planning cannot be solved. Furthermore, geospatial data management plays a connecting role between data acquisition, data modelling, data visualization, and data analysis. It enables the continuous availability of geospatial data and the replicability of geospatial data analysis. In the first part of this article, five milestones of geospatial data management research are presented that were achieved during the last decade. The first one reflects advancements in BIM/GIS integration at data, process, and application levels. The second milestone presents theoretical progress by introducing topology as a key concept of geospatial data management. In the third milestone, 3D/4D geospatial data management is described as a key concept for city modelling, including subsurface models. Progress in modelling and visualization of massive geospatial features on web platforms is the fourth milestone which includes discrete global grid systems as an alternative geospatial reference framework. The intensive use of geosensor data sources is the fifth milestone which opens the way to parallel data storage platforms supporting data analysis on geosensors. In the second part of this article, five future directions of geospatial data management research are presented that have the potential to become key research fields of geospatial data management in the next decade. Geo-data science will have the task to extract knowledge from unstructured and structured geospatial data and to bridge the gap between modern information technology concepts and the geo-related sciences. Topology is presented as a powerful and general concept to analyze GIS and BIM data structures and spatial relations that will be of great importance in emerging applications such as smart cities and digital twins. Data-streaming libraries and “in-situ” geo-computing on objects executed directly on the sensors will revolutionize geo-information science and bridge geo-computing with geospatial data management. Advanced geospatial data visualization on web platforms will enable the representation of dynamically changing geospatial features or moving objects’ trajectories. Finally, geospatial data management will support big geospatial data analysis, and graph databases are expected to experience a revival on top of parallel and distributed data stores supporting big geospatial data analysis.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.942
Threshold uncertainty score0.382

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 communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.271 · 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