MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Quality Evaluation of Volunteered Geographic Information

2019· book-chapter· en· W4230639866 on OpenAlexaffabout
Hongyu Zhang, Jacek Malczewski

Bibliographic record

VenueIGI Global eBooks · 2019
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGeographic Information Systems Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVolunteered geographic informationGeospatial analysisInteractivityGeolocationGlobal Positioning SystemComputer scienceContext (archaeology)Data scienceGeographyCrowdsourcingQuality (philosophy)Geographic information systemGeovisualizationWorld Wide WebCartographyData miningVisualizationInformation visualization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A large amount of crowd-sourced geospatial data have been created in recent years due to the interactivity of Web 2.0 and the availability of Global Positioning System (GPS). This geo-information is typically referred to as volunteered geographic information (VGI). OpenStreetMap (OSM) is a popular VGI platform that allows users to create or edit maps using GPS-enabled devices or aerial imageries. The issue of quality of geo-information generated by OSM has become a trending research topic because of the large size of the dataset and the inapplicability of Linus' Law in a geospatial context. This chapter systematically reviews the quality evaluation process of OSM, and demonstrates a case study of London, Canada for the assessment of completeness, positional accuracy and attribute accuracy. The findings of the quality evaluation can potentially serve as a guide of cartographic product selection and provide a better understanding of the development of OSM quality over geographic space and time.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.973
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIGI Global eBooksSame topicGeographic Information Systems StudiesFrench-language works237,207