General Method for Extending Discrete Global Grid Systems to Three Dimensions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Geospatial sensors are generating increasing amounts of three-dimensional (3D) data. While Discrete Global Grid Systems (DGGS) are a useful tool for integrating geospatial data, they provide no native support for 3D data. Several different 3D global grids have been proposed; however, these approaches are not consistent with state-of-the-art DGGSs. In this paper, we propose a general method that can extend any DGGS to the third dimension to operate as a 3D DGGS. This extension is done carefully to ensure any valid DGGS can be supported, including all refinement factors and non-congruent refinement. We define encoding, decoding, and indexing operations in a way that splits responsibility between the surface DGGS and the 3D component, which allows for easy transference of data between the 2D and 3D versions of a DGGS. As a part of this, we use radial mapping functions that serve a similar purpose as polyhedral projection in a conventional DGGS. We validate our method by creating three different 3D DGGSs tailored for three specific use cases. These use cases demonstrate our ability to quickly generate 3D global grids while achieving desired properties such as support for large ranges of altitudes, volume preservation between cells, and custom cell aspect ratio.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".