DECART Quality Measurement Tools João João Matos, Alexandre Gonçalves, Ricardo Sousa, Jaime Martins Instituto Superior Técnico
MOTIVATION 0
TO ILLUSTRATE THE APPLICABILITY OF THE CONCEPTS IN: 19113 Quality Principles; 19114 Quality Evaluation Procedures. TO PRESENT AN EXPLORATORY STUDY ON THE STRUCTURE OF A GENERIC QUALITY EVALUATION SOFTWARE..
OBJECTIVES FOR A GENERIC QUALITY EVALUATION SOFTWARE EXEMPLIFICATION FOR REAL CASES PROTOTYPE OF DECART IN IN A CAD ENVIRONMENT PROTOTYPE OF DECART IN IN A GIS ENVIRONMENT
1 OBJECTIVES FOR A GENERIC QUALITY EVALUATION SOFTWARE
CONFORMANCE TO 19113,19114 USE OF THE QUALITY ELEMENTS AND SUBQUALITY ELEMENTS COMPLETENESS CONSISTENCY POSITIONAL ACCURACY TEMPORAL ACCURACY THEMATIC ACCURACY
CONFORMANCE TO 19113,19114 USE OF THE CONCEPTS QUALITY EVALUATION METHOD DIRECT EVALUATION --EXTERNAL EVALUATION --INTERNAL EVALUATION REPORTING AS METADATA OR Q.E. REPORT
OPERATIONAL ISSUES SIMPLE MEASUREMENTS (NOT (NOT DEPENDENT DEPENDENT OF OF EXPENSIVE, EXPENSIVE, UNAVAILABLE UNAVAILABLE OR OR COMPLEX COMPLEX REFERENCE REFERENCE MEASUREMENTS) MEASUREMENTS) AUTOMATION EASYNESS OF REPORTING INTEGRATION ON THE PRODUCT LIFECYCLE
OPERATIONAL CONSTRAINTS DEPENDENCY ON AN UNDERLYING SOFTWARE DEPENDENCY ON METADATA APPLICATION
OPERATIONAL CONSTRAINTS MANY RESULTS ARE LIKELY TO NEVER BE REPORTED (e.g. (e.g. SOME SOME TOPOLOGICAL CONSISTENCY RESULTS, FORMAT CONSISTENCY). QEP CAN LEAD TO A REPORT OR TO THE EXECUTION OF THE PROCEDURES LEADING TO THE CONFORMANCE
2 INTERNAL EVALUATION
SPECIFICATIONS LINES LINES IN IN LAYER LAYER abc abc SHOULD SHOULD FORM FORM CLOSED CLOSED POLYGONS POLYGONS LINES LINES IN IN LAYER LAYER def def SHOULD SHOULD FORM FORM A CONNECTED CONNECTED GRAPH GRAPH LINES LINES IN IN LAYER LAYER ghi ghi ARE ARE RED RED AND AND WITH WITH LINETYPE LINETYPE CONTINUOUS CONTINUOUS ALL ALL POLYGONS POLYGONS OF OF THE THE THEME THEME HOUSES HOUSES SHOULD SHOULD HAVE HAVE A SPOT SPOT HEIGHT HEIGHT INSIDE INSIDE RAILWAYS RAILWAYS DO DO NOT NOT INTERSECT INTERSECT HOUSES HOUSES ELEVATIONS ELEVATIONS ARE ARE ALLWAYS ALLWAYS HIGHER HIGHER THAN THAN 0 AND AND LOWER LOWER THAN THAN 2000M 2000M CONTOURS CONTOURS ARE ARE HORIZONTAL HORIZONTAL LINES LINES......
3 EXTERNAL EVALUATION
De validação da carta 1/1000 de Lisboa.
Completeness Coefficient ICIST C = Qr Q + Q o r *100 Qr - represented quantity Qo - ommited quantity De Estudo para Validação da Carta 1/1000 de Lisboa (PROET).
COUNT ICIST Result of counting the number of objects or components Zona Método Comprimento (m) nº de Pontos Área (ha) Nº Polígonos Nº de linhas I 121241 5689 6768 33 82 A II 118836 2139 6749 31 70 III 121686 2843 6777 36 134
ZONA OMITIDO REPRESENTADO nºentidades área omitida perímetro nº entidades área total perímetro total I 16 961 491 2352 119213 53960 II 13 4226 983 2399 162675 71902 III 5 113 94 2522 282084 90018 IV 4 64 59 4034 203210 96345 V 4 771 253 1341 153376 58991 Quadro 1 - Omissões em entidades do tipo polígono (área em m 2 e perímetro em m).
ZONA OMITIDO REPRESENTADO nºentidades comprimento nº entidades comprimento I 8 115 1781 15185 II 8 83 887 86805 III 2 25 807 27773 IV 0 0 957 25866 V 5 244 1341 33839
ZONA C nº área perímetro I 99,3 99,20 99,10 II 99,5 97,47 98,65 III 99,8 99,96 99,90 IV 99,9 99,97 99,94 V 99,7 99,5 99,57
BUFFERS ICIST Measurement of length inside the buffer Método 10m 20m 50m II-I 51% 84% 99% II-III 63% 92% 99% III-I 43% 77% 100%
A ICIST A ^~B ~A ^ B B B: A ^ B A: A ^ B
POSITIONAL ACCURACY X OMISSION ICIST 1 2 OBJECT X GRAPHICAL ELEMENT 2 1
1 2
PHOTOGRAMMETRIC SURVEY GROUND SURVEY ICIST De estudo para validação da carta 1/1000 de Lisboa (PROET/LTE). DIFFERENCE VECTORS (MAGNIFIED)
DISTANCE BETWEEN LINES ICIST MEAN OF THE DISTANCES IN VERTICES D D HAUSDORFF DISTANCE A B = A B = ( sup ( inf d ( x, y) )) x A y B ( sup ( inf d ( x, y) )) y B x A INNER AREA DISTANCE DH ( D A D ) = Max =, B B A
Different importance between systematic and random errors. 100m De estudo para a digitalização da REN (ICN).
TRANSFORMATION GAIN ICIST Diferença (Teste-Objecto) 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 G = n ( p' i pi p' i p i ) 1 n " i= 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 >70 Diferença (m) Transformação de 1º Grau Transformação de 3º Grau 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 >35 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 More Diferença (m) Diferença (m) x σ x y σ y d σ d Objecto -Teste 9.6 12.1 15.0 19.6 24.1 16.1 Objecto-P 1 (Teste) 0.0 8.8 0.0 11.9 11.9 8.5 Objecto-P 3 (Teste) 0.0 7.9 0.0 10.7 11.0 7.4
ABSOLUT ERROR DIAGRAM RELATIVE ERROR DIAGRAM
Mangualde Abs-ori 0-10 10-20 20-50 50-100 100-210 Mangualde Abs-Rel-Ori -150 - -50-50 - -25-25 - 0 0-25 25-50 50-150
Mangualde Abs-Grau3 0-10 10-20 20-50 50-100 100-220 Mangualde Abs-Rel-Grau3-150 - -50-50 - -25-25 - 0 0-25 25-50 50-150
THE SOFTWARE 4
INTERNAL EVALUATION BASED ON SPECIFICATIONS AUTOMATED 100% INSPECTION PASS/FAIL
EXTERNAL EVALUATION REFERENCE DATA IS IS REQUIRED NOT ENTIRELY AUTOMATED INSPECTION BY SAMPLING
RESULTS: CORRECTION/REPORTING CORRECTION TOOLS AVAILABLE REPORTING TOOLS