...
首页> 外文期刊>Annals of GIS >Geographic disparity of positional errors and matching rate of residential addresses among geocoding solutions
【24h】

Geographic disparity of positional errors and matching rate of residential addresses among geocoding solutions

机译:地理编码解决方案中位置误差的地理差异和住宅地址的匹配率

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

The purpose of this study was to systematically examine the geographic disparity of geocoding error among different geocoding solutions. The research questions include: (1) What are the positional accuracies and matching rates of various geocoding techniques? (2) Are there any significant differences of geocoding quality in rural and urban areas? In this study, 1100 residential addresses scattered across Texas, USA, were address-matched using eight different geocoding platforms, including the ESRI ArcGIS Address Locator, CoreLogic PxPoint, Google Maps API, Yahoo! PlaceFinder, Microsoft Bing, Geocoder.us, Texas A&M University Geocoder, and OpenStreetMap (OSM). The geocoded locations for each method were validated against the GPS data and manual digitization. Using GPS data as reference data, the desktop geocoding using parcel data achieved the highest positional accuracy with a mean error of 24.8 m, whereas the Google Maps API was the best among the six Internet solutions with a mean error of 31.7 m. All geocoding solutions, except Geocoder.us and OSM, achieved a matching rate >95%. It is important to note, however, that the OSM geocoding revealed decent positional accuracy in terms of median and 5% trimmed mean errors, indicating the potential of crowdsourcing approach to produce an accurate geospatial data set. The geocoding errors between urban and rural areas were significantly different in most geocoding solutions but there was no consistent and monotonic trend. Excluding the errors of outliers, defined as the lowest 5 percentile, indeed changed the direction of urban versus rural accuracy in OSM, PxPoint, and ArcGIS geocoding.
机译:这项研究的目的是系统地检查不同地理编码解决方案之间地理编码错误的地理差异。研究的问题包括:(1)各种地理编码技术的位置精度和匹配率是多少? (2)农村和城市地区的地理编码质量是否存在显着差异?在这项研究中,使用八个不同的地理编码平台(包括ESRI ArcGIS地址定位器,CoreLogic PxPoint,Google Maps API和Yahoo!)对分布在美国德克萨斯州的1100个住宅地址进行了地址匹配。 PlaceFinder,Microsoft Bing,Geocoder.us,德克萨斯A&M大学Geocoder和OpenStreetMap(OSM)。每种方法的地理编码位置已根据GPS数据和手动数字化进行了验证。使用GPS数据作为参考数据,使用宗地数据进行的桌面地理编码实现了最高的定位精度,平均误差为24.8 m,而Google Maps API是六种Internet解决方案中最好的,平均误差为31.7 m。除Geocoder.us和OSM外,所有地理编码解决方案的匹配率均> 95%。不过,必须注意的是,OSM地理编码显示了中位数和5%的均值误差校正后的正确位置精度,这表明了采用众包方法生成准确地理空间数据集的潜力。在大多数地理编码解决方案中,城乡之间的地理编码错误存在显着差异,但没有一致且单调的趋势。排除定义为最低5%的异常值的误差,确实改变了OSM,PxPoint和ArcGIS地理编码中城市相对于农村准确度的方向。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号