Abstract
The quality aspects of spatial data are very important in the decision-making process. However, the quality inspection of spatial data is still dependent on manual checking, and there is an urgent need to develop an automatic or semi-automatic generic system for spatial data quality inspection. In this paper, we present a general framework that automatically copes with spatial data quality inspection based on various spatial data quality standards and specifications. The framework involves all descriptions of given spatial data, a data quality model characterized by quality elements, scheme batch checking and spatial data quality assessment based on quality control and assessment procedures. It is implemented in Unified Modeling Language with four main sets of classes: data dictionary, quality model, scheme checking and quality assessment. Accordingly, we have designed four structured Extensible Markup Language files for the framework to organize and describe the data dictionary, quality model, scheme check and quality assessment. It is very easy for users to describe the data requirements using the data dictionary file, and to extend the quality elements or check rules using the quality model file. Users can design the specified checks and quality assessment schemes without coding by configuring the scheme check files and quality assessment scheme files. The framework also incorporates a checking tool capable of solving the difficulties inherent in the diversity of spatial data quality standards and specifications. The proposed framework and its implementation, as a quality inspection system, will facilitate automatic multiple spatial data quality inspection and acceptance. As a result, the quality of diversified spatial data can be ensured and improved, which is extremely important in the era of spatial big data.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aronoff S (1989) Geographic information systems: a management perspective. Geocarto Int 4(4):58. doi:10.1080/10106048909354237
Beckert B, Hähnle R, Schmitt PH (2007) Verification of object-oriented software: The KeY approach. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg
Burnicki AC, Brown DG, Goovaerts P (2007) Simulating error propagation in land-cover change analysis: the implications of temporal dependence. Comput Environ Urban Syst 31(3):282–302
Burrough PA (2001) GIS and geostatistics: essential partners for spatial analysis. Environ Ecol Stat 8(4):361–377
Cao Y, Song W (2009) Research on RSDOM and DLG quality mutual check and evaluation technique. Urban Remote Sensing Event, 2009 Joint, 2009, pp 1–6. doi:10.1109/URS.2009.5137579
Chen X, Pan M, Wu H, Yang J, Zhu L (2005) DEM Data Quality Detecting Based on Spatial Index. Appl Res Comput (09):28–30
Crosetto M, Tarantola S (2001) Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis: tools for GIS-based model implementation. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 15(5):415–437
De Champeaux D, Lea D, Faure P (1993) Object-oriented system development. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston
Delavar MR, Devillers R (2010) Spatial data quality: from process to decisions. Trans GIS 14(4):379–386. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9671.2010.01224.x
Department of Commerce (1992) Spatial Data Transfer Standard (SDTS). http://mcmcweb.er.usgs.gov/sdts/standard.html. Accessed 17 Sept 2013
Devillers R, Jeansoulin R (2006) Fundamentals of spatial data quality. ISTE, London
Duckham M (2002) A user-oriented perspective of error-sensitive GIS development. Trans GIS 6(2):179–193
Esri (2007) QA/QC for GIS Data. http://training.esri.com/gateway/index.cfm?CourseID=50099063_9.X&fa=catalog.courseDetail. Accessed 23 Feb 2014
Evans MR, Oliver D, Zhou X, Shekhar S (2014) Spatial big data. In: Karimi HA (ed) Big data: Techniques and technologies in geoinformatics. CRC Press, New York, pp 150–156
Fisher P (1997) Book reviews. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 11(4):407–408. doi:10.1080/136588197242356
Foken T, Göockede M, Mauder M, Mahrt L, Amiro B, Munger W (2005) Post-field data quality control. In: Lee X, Massman W, Law B (eds) Handbook of Micrometeorology. Springer, pp 181–208
Forier F, Canters F (1996) A user-friendly tool for error modelling and error propagation in a GIS environment. United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report Rm, pp 225–234
Fu H (2010) Quality control and assessment of 1:2000 DLG. China Place Name (03):70–71
Gong P, Mu L (2000) Error detection through consistency checking. Geogr Inf Sci 6(2):188–193
Goodchild MF, Gopal S (1989) The accuracy of spatial databases. Taylor & Fancis, London
Guptill SC, Morrison JLA (1995) Elements of spatial data quality. Elsevier Science, New York
Hegde NP, Hegde GL (2007) Quality control in large spatial databases maintenance. In: 5th International Symposium for Spatial Data Quality. ITC, Enschede, p 3
Heuvelink GBM (1993) Error propagation in quantitative spatial modelling: applications in geographical information systems. Dissertation, University of Utrecht
Heuvelink GBM, Brown JD, van Loon EE (2007) A probabilistic framework for representing and simulating uncertain environmental variables. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 21(5):497–513
ISO (2005) ISO 9000:2005: Quality management systems – Fundamentals and vocabulary. International Organization for Standardization (ISO), Geneva, p 30
ISO (2013) ISO 19157:2013: Geographic information – data quality. International Organization for Standardization (ISO), Geneva, p 164
Langran G, Chrisman NR (1988) A framework for temporal geographic information. Cartographica: Int J Geogr Inf Geovisualization 25(3):1–14
Li D, Zhang J, Wu H (2012) Spatial data quality and beyond. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 26(12):2277–2290. doi:10.1080/13658816.2012.719625
Malenfant J, Jacques M, Demers FN (1996) A tutorial on behavioral reflection and its implementation. In: Kiczales G (ed) Proceedings of the Reflection ‘96 Conference, San Francisco, California, USA, 1996, pp 1–20
McGranaghan M (1993) A cartographic view of spatial data quality. Cartographica: Int J Geogr Inf Geovisualization 30(2):8–19. doi:10.3138/310V-0067-7570-6566
NASMG (1994) GB 14804--93: Classification and codes for the features of 1:500,1:1000 and 1:2000 topographic maps. National Administration of Surveying, Mapping and Geoinformation (NASMG), Beijing, p 19
NASMG (1995) CH 1002--1995: Specifications for inspection and acceptance of surveying and mapping product. National Administration of Surveying, Mapping and Geoinformation (NASMG), Beijing, p 24
NASMG (2007) GB/T 20258.1-2007: Data dictionary for fundamental geographic information features -- Part 1:Data dictionary for fundamental geographic information features of 1:500 1:1 000 1:2 000 scale. National Administration of Surveying, Mapping and Geoinformation (NASMG), Beijing, p 498
NASMG (2008) GB/T 18316–2008: Specifications for inspection and acceptance of quality of digital surveying and mapping achievements. National Administration of Surveying, Mapping and Geoinformation (NASMG), Beijing, p 27
NIST (1994) Federal Information Processing Standard Publication 173. (Spatial Data Transfer Standard Part 1. Version 1.1). National Institute Of Technology (NIST), U.S. Department of Commerce, p 193
NMPQITC (2013) GDPJ 09–2013: Specifications for inspection and acceptance of General Survey Achievements of Geographic. National Mapping Product Quality Inspection and Testing Center (NMPQITC), Beijing, p 33
OMG (2007) Unified Modeling Language: Superstructure, version 2.1.1 (non-change bar). Document formal/2007-02-05. http://www.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?formal/2007-02-05. Accessed 16 Jan 2014
Oort PV (2006) Spatial data quality: from description to application. Dissertation, Wageningen University
Shi WZ (2008) From uncertainty description to spatial data quality control. Proceedings of the 8th International Symposium on Spatial Accuracy Assessment in Natural Resources and Environmental Sciences, Vol II: Accuracy in Geomatics, Liverpool, 2008, pp 412–417
Shi WZ, Fisher P, Goodchild MF (2003) Spatial data quality. Taylor & Francis, London
Skidmore A (2002) Accuracy assessment of spatial information. In: Stein A, Meer F, Gorte B (eds), vol 1. Remote Sensing and Digital Image Processing. Springer Netherlands, pp 197–209. doi:10.1007/0-306-47647-9_12
USGS (1941) United States National Map Accuracy Standards. US Geological Survey (USGS), p 1
Veregin H (1999) Data quality parameters. In: Goodchild MF, Maguire DJ, Rhind DW (eds) Geographical information systems. Wiley, New York, pp 177–189
W3C (2008) Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0 (Fifth Edition). http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-xml-20081126/. Accessed 24 Aug 2013
Whitney CW, Lind BK, Wahl PW (1998) Quality assurance and quality control in longitudinal studies. Epidemiol Rev 20(1):71–80
Wu D, Hu H, Yang XM, Zheng YD, Zhang LH (2010) Digital chart cartography: error and quality control. The international archives of the photogrammetry. Remote Sens Spat Inf Sci 38(Part II):255–260
Wu M, Zeng J, Li Q (2012) Development of quality checking software for the Second National Land Inventory. Land Resour Informatization (04):12–18
Wu H, Ye L, Shi W, Clarke KC (2014) Assessing the effects of land use spatial structure on urban heat islands using HJ-1B remote sensing imagery in Wuhan, China. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinformation 32:67–78
Zeng J (2009) Quality control and assessment of 1:500 DLG. Beijing Surv Mapp (03):66–68
Zheng F, Wang X (2009) Quality control and detection for data production of 1:10000 topographic maps (DLG). Geospatial Inf (01):91–94
Acknowledgments
This research was sponsored by the National Key Technology R&D Program of China (Grant No. 2012BAJ15B04) and the Hong Kong Polytechnic University Joint Supervision Scheme with the Chinese Mainland (Grant No. G-UA35). The authors would also like to thank the Editor and the two anonymous reviewers whose insightful suggestions have significantly improved this paper.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Communicated by: H. A. Babaie
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Wan, Y., Shi, W., Gao, L. et al. A general framework for spatial data inspection and assessment. Earth Sci Inform 8, 919–935 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12145-014-0196-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12145-014-0196-9