Geospatial data quality indicators

Victoria Lush, Lucy Bastin, Jo Lumsden

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter (peer-reviewed)

Abstract

Indicators which summarise the characteristics of spatiotemporal data coverages significantly simplify quality evaluation, decision making and justification processes by providing a number of quality cues that are easy to manage and avoiding information overflow. Criteria which are commonly prioritised in evaluating spatial data quality and assessing a dataset’s fitness for use include lineage, completeness, logical consistency, positional accuracy, temporal and attribute accuracy. However, user requirements may go far beyond these broadlyaccepted spatial quality metrics, to incorporate specific and complex factors which are less easily measured. This paper discusses the results of a study of high level user requirements in geospatial data selection and data quality evaluation. It reports on the geospatial data quality indicators which were identified as user priorities, and which can potentially be standardised to enable intercomparison of datasets against user requirements. We briefly describe the implications for tools and standards to support the communication and intercomparison of data quality, and the ways in which these can contribute to the generation of a GEO label.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationProceedings of the 10th international symposium on spatial accuracy assessment in natural resources and environmental sciences
EditorsCarlos Vieira, Vania Bogorny, Artur R. Aquino
Pages121-126
Number of pages6
Publication statusPublished - 2012
Event10th international symposium on spatial accuracy assessment in natural resources and environmental sciences - Florianópolis, SC, Brazil
Duration: 10 Jul 201213 Jul 2012

Other

Other10th international symposium on spatial accuracy assessment in natural resources and environmental sciences
CountryBrazil
CityFlorianópolis, SC
Period10/07/1213/07/12

Fingerprint

data quality
spatial data
fitness
decision making
communication
indicator
evaluation

Bibliographical note

The Users can download and copy the information, documents and other data for User's personal, non-commercial use, without any right to resell, redistribute or create derivative works.

Keywords

  • geospatial data
  • quality evaluation
  • geospatial data quality indicators
  • geospatial data quality

Cite this

Lush, V., Bastin, L., & Lumsden, J. (2012). Geospatial data quality indicators. In C. Vieira, V. Bogorny, & A. R. Aquino (Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th international symposium on spatial accuracy assessment in natural resources and environmental sciences (pp. 121-126)
Lush, Victoria ; Bastin, Lucy ; Lumsden, Jo. / Geospatial data quality indicators. Proceedings of the 10th international symposium on spatial accuracy assessment in natural resources and environmental sciences. editor / Carlos Vieira ; Vania Bogorny ; Artur R. Aquino. 2012. pp. 121-126
@inbook{7ad7faf08a204c0da5f29dbc86fdf55b,
title = "Geospatial data quality indicators",
abstract = "Indicators which summarise the characteristics of spatiotemporal data coverages significantly simplify quality evaluation, decision making and justification processes by providing a number of quality cues that are easy to manage and avoiding information overflow. Criteria which are commonly prioritised in evaluating spatial data quality and assessing a dataset’s fitness for use include lineage, completeness, logical consistency, positional accuracy, temporal and attribute accuracy. However, user requirements may go far beyond these broadlyaccepted spatial quality metrics, to incorporate specific and complex factors which are less easily measured. This paper discusses the results of a study of high level user requirements in geospatial data selection and data quality evaluation. It reports on the geospatial data quality indicators which were identified as user priorities, and which can potentially be standardised to enable intercomparison of datasets against user requirements. We briefly describe the implications for tools and standards to support the communication and intercomparison of data quality, and the ways in which these can contribute to the generation of a GEO label.",
keywords = "geospatial data, quality evaluation, geospatial data quality indicators, geospatial data quality",
author = "Victoria Lush and Lucy Bastin and Jo Lumsden",
note = "The Users can download and copy the information, documents and other data for User's personal, non-commercial use, without any right to resell, redistribute or create derivative works.",
year = "2012",
language = "English",
pages = "121--126",
editor = "Carlos Vieira and Vania Bogorny and Aquino, {Artur R.}",
booktitle = "Proceedings of the 10th international symposium on spatial accuracy assessment in natural resources and environmental sciences",

}

Lush, V, Bastin, L & Lumsden, J 2012, Geospatial data quality indicators. in C Vieira, V Bogorny & AR Aquino (eds), Proceedings of the 10th international symposium on spatial accuracy assessment in natural resources and environmental sciences. pp. 121-126, 10th international symposium on spatial accuracy assessment in natural resources and environmental sciences, Florianópolis, SC, Brazil, 10/07/12.

Geospatial data quality indicators. / Lush, Victoria; Bastin, Lucy; Lumsden, Jo.

Proceedings of the 10th international symposium on spatial accuracy assessment in natural resources and environmental sciences. ed. / Carlos Vieira; Vania Bogorny; Artur R. Aquino. 2012. p. 121-126.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter (peer-reviewed)

TY - CHAP

T1 - Geospatial data quality indicators

AU - Lush, Victoria

AU - Bastin, Lucy

AU - Lumsden, Jo

N1 - The Users can download and copy the information, documents and other data for User's personal, non-commercial use, without any right to resell, redistribute or create derivative works.

PY - 2012

Y1 - 2012

N2 - Indicators which summarise the characteristics of spatiotemporal data coverages significantly simplify quality evaluation, decision making and justification processes by providing a number of quality cues that are easy to manage and avoiding information overflow. Criteria which are commonly prioritised in evaluating spatial data quality and assessing a dataset’s fitness for use include lineage, completeness, logical consistency, positional accuracy, temporal and attribute accuracy. However, user requirements may go far beyond these broadlyaccepted spatial quality metrics, to incorporate specific and complex factors which are less easily measured. This paper discusses the results of a study of high level user requirements in geospatial data selection and data quality evaluation. It reports on the geospatial data quality indicators which were identified as user priorities, and which can potentially be standardised to enable intercomparison of datasets against user requirements. We briefly describe the implications for tools and standards to support the communication and intercomparison of data quality, and the ways in which these can contribute to the generation of a GEO label.

AB - Indicators which summarise the characteristics of spatiotemporal data coverages significantly simplify quality evaluation, decision making and justification processes by providing a number of quality cues that are easy to manage and avoiding information overflow. Criteria which are commonly prioritised in evaluating spatial data quality and assessing a dataset’s fitness for use include lineage, completeness, logical consistency, positional accuracy, temporal and attribute accuracy. However, user requirements may go far beyond these broadlyaccepted spatial quality metrics, to incorporate specific and complex factors which are less easily measured. This paper discusses the results of a study of high level user requirements in geospatial data selection and data quality evaluation. It reports on the geospatial data quality indicators which were identified as user priorities, and which can potentially be standardised to enable intercomparison of datasets against user requirements. We briefly describe the implications for tools and standards to support the communication and intercomparison of data quality, and the ways in which these can contribute to the generation of a GEO label.

KW - geospatial data

KW - quality evaluation

KW - geospatial data quality indicators

KW - geospatial data quality

M3 - Chapter (peer-reviewed)

SP - 121

EP - 126

BT - Proceedings of the 10th international symposium on spatial accuracy assessment in natural resources and environmental sciences

A2 - Vieira, Carlos

A2 - Bogorny, Vania

A2 - Aquino, Artur R.

ER -

Lush V, Bastin L, Lumsden J. Geospatial data quality indicators. In Vieira C, Bogorny V, Aquino AR, editors, Proceedings of the 10th international symposium on spatial accuracy assessment in natural resources and environmental sciences. 2012. p. 121-126