MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7097034282

THE UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY A JAVA IMPLEMENTATION FOR OPEN GIS SIMPLE FEATURE SPECIFICATION

2001· article· en· W7097034282 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGeographic Information Systems Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJavaInteroperabilityGIS applicationsDistributed GISUnified Modeling LanguageGeoprocessingGeographic information systemAM/FM/GISComponent (thermodynamics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Distributed GIS is the trend in the current GIS community. It has been recognized that interoperability is one of major issues in the distributed geocomputing environment. To respond to non-interoperability problem, OGC creates a series of specifications to form an open framework as GIS standards. These standards are increasingly accepted by GIS software vendors, geodata and geoprocessing providers, and users. This research focuses on an implementation of OpenGIS Simple Features Specification in the Java computing platform, which is an important family member of OGC’s specifications. A Java version Implementation Specification for OpenGIS Simple Features is designed in this research based on the review and analysis of the OGC Abstract Specification, OGC implementation specifications for SQL, OLE/COM and CORBA, and other related works done by other organizations. The Geometry Data Model, the spatial component of OpenGIS Simple Features, was designed and implemented following the new Implementation Specification. The Template Union Model for buffer operation was introduced, and some new algorithms were developed. The reasonable geometry object classification logic made the designed model more extendable and implementable. The UML technology and Java standards applied in the design and implementation procedures made the model more maintainable and distributable. An easy-to-use Conformance Testing Suite was also developed to check whether or not each implementation is strictly compatible with the requirements of the new Simple Features Implementation Specification. The application example demonstrated that the design and implementation of the designed specification in this thesis are successful. iii

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.131

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0340.021

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeographic Information Systems StudiesFrench-language works237,207