GIS 5935 Lab 1

 Medium-sized image of your map layout (Deliverable 2) 



The numerical results for horizontal accuracy and precision (Deliverable 4) 

Report your results for horizontal accuracy. 

3.3m

How does this compare to your results for horizontal precision? 

This result is less than the anticipated 68th percentile precision of 4.5m

Report your results for vertical accuracy. 

6.0m


How does this compare to your results for vertical precision? 

This is almost 2 more meters above the vertical precision measurement of 4m

In general, is there any evidence of bias in your results? If so, where? 

There is evidence of bias in the vertical results because the vertical accuracy of 6m is significantly worse than the calculated vertical precision. 


A very brief statement on how horizontal accuracy and precision are measured (so readers know the difference between the two)

Horizontal accuracy and precision are measured by comparing a set of measurements to a known true value. Accuracy refers to how close the measurements are to the true value, while precision refers to how close the measurements are to each other.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

GIS 5007 - About Me!

Image
 Hi - I joined the GIS program in the fall of 2024 to formalize my GIS training after more than a decade of learning to use GIS independently. I'm an Archaeologist, with my BA and MA in Anthropology, and have worked for the UWF Archaeology Institute as a research associate since 2015. In the past few years, I have become actively involved in cemetery preservation and research. Something that you can read a little bit more about on my story map . Ultimately I am hoping to add GISP to my credentials list. Resetting a marker in AME Zion Cemetery Exploring Oakland Cemetery in Atlanta with the Association for Gravestone Studies Conference.
Read more

GIS 5100 Module 5 Damage Assessment

Image
 For this week's exercise we were tasked with conducting a structural damage assessment of a few block area impacted by Hurricane Sandy. We were asked to create a map of the path of Hurricane Sandy We were then given a very large raster data set with a very small project area to assess structural damage. Knowing something about Hurricane Sandy and the amount of damage, I immediately ruled out the possibility that there were any structures with no damage or only affected or sustained minor damage. I then narrowed in on determining which structures were destroyed and which sustained major damage. To complete the analysis of damage within a distance of the shoreline I used the created shoreline to create buffers of 0-100 m, 100-200m, and 200-300m. I used a basic join to derive counts for the following result
Read more

GIS 5100 M4

Image
 For this week's exercise, we spent a considerable amount of time evaluating out-of-date elevation data, looking at the potential impact of storm surge data. This included comparing potential inundation models using LIDAR and USGS DEM-derived data. For the first exercise we were asked to compare Lidar data from New Jersey pre and post Hurricane Sandy. We were given several areas to asses and evaluate what has changed as well as looking at how the area has redeveloped based on a more recently derived buildings shapefile. We then turned our attention to the Tampa Bay Area where we looked at different methods of modeling storm surge and evaluated the predictive ability of each model. This included comparing counts of the types of buildings each building would see as flooded or not As well as comparing which models predicted a percentage of each type of building would be flooded to compare the accuracy of the different models Finally we created a map showing the agreement between the d...
Read more