Roehnert ppt gi2011_cbh_v2_final

Sylvia Röhnert, Claudia Gedrange, Marco Neubert

Cross border harmonisation in practice –

exemplified by Saxon ATKIS and Czech ZABAGED data

GI 2011-X-Border-SDI/GDI-SymposiumBad Schandau and Děčín

www.geodat.ioer.info

GI2011-X-Border-SDI/GDI-Symposium, 23/24.05.2011, Bad Schandau/Děčín

Project Outline

Used Data

Objectives

Geometric Homogenisation

Semantic Harmonisation

Results

Contents



Duration: 01/2009 – 12/2011

Funding: European Union (EFRE, Ziel 3/Cíl 3 SN/CZ) and the Free State of Saxony

Partner:Leibniz-Institute of Ecological and Regional Development

e.V. Dresden (IÖR) - Lead Partner

Land Surveying Office of Saxony: Staatsbetrieb Geobasisinformation und Vermessung Sachsen (GeoSN)

Land Surveying Office of the Czech Republic:

Zeměměřický Úřad (ZÚ)

Project Outline



Initial position - different data models -

ATKIS

(D)

ZABAGED

(CZ)



Objectives

“Cross-Border Harmonisation of Spatial Base Data”

Interoperability on data and model level

Identification and handling with differences

Development of methods for semantic and geometric matching

Establish semantically comparable and geometrically connected data






Geometric Homogenisation - Objectives -


bilingual object type catalogues

matching functions

matching categories for semantic comparision of data models


consistent coordinate reference system

integration of a common border geometry

edge matching of cross-border objects



Geometric Homogenisation- Approach -

Coordinate reference system (CRS)

Czech Republik: S-JTSK with Krovak coordinates

Saxony: RD83 with Gauss-Krüger coordinates

definition of a common CRS - ETRS89/UTM

generation of transformation rules



Geometric Harmonisation- Approach -

Common Border Geometry

currently used in Saxony

and CR: inexact border geometry

common border measurement

integration of exact measured

border geometry to both datasets

until 2014



Connection of objects along a common border

identify relevant cross-border-object types

definition of connection points

development of a method for geometric homogenisation (Sicad-Open)

edge matching of important cross border objects

Geometric Homogenisation- Approach -






Semantic Harmonisation - Objectives -



matching functions

matching categories for semantic comparision of data models


consistent coordinate reference system

integration of a common border geometry

edge matching of cross-border objects



Semantic Harmonisation- Approach -

Original data models

Semantic concepts

Similarities, Heterogenities

Mapping functions and categories

Interoperable data models

Concept comparison

Data model alignment

Semantic analysis

Bilingual object type catalogues

Generatetransformation rules

Translation



Bilingual Object Catalogues

Translation of object type catalogues

Bilingual database of all object types and attributes



object types and attributes

ATKIS: overlaying object types

similar themes

different level of detail

Analysis of data models



generation of ‚combination tables„ for the comparision and mapping

attributes for further object type description

ATKIS: object types and attributes used in saxony („Bestandsdaten“)

Semantic Harmonisation- matching tables -

ID Theme ObjectTypeAttribute 1

A1_nameA1_value

A1_value_nameAttribute2

A2_name A2_value A2_value_name

A_52003_001 42 AX_Schleuse KONkonstruktionsmerkmalBauart

ZUS zustand


1010 Schiffshebewerk ZUS zustand


1020 Kammerschleuse ZUS zustand


ZUS zustand 2100Außer Betrieb, stillgelegt, verlassen


1010 Schiffshebewerk ZUS zustand 2100Außer Betrieb, stillgelegt, verlassen


1020 Kammerschleuse ZUS zustand 2100Außer Betrieb, stillgelegt, verlassen



matching tables with functions for each concept

object type – attribute value – combinations:

ca. 1100 for ATKIS

ca. 300 for ZABAGED

both transformation directions

complexity and heterogeneity of data models

multiple mappings or no possible mapping

categories for quality of mapping functions

Semantic Harmonisation- mapping functions -



A - Biunique

B - Superset (Z is part of A)

C - Overlap

D - Subset (A is part of Z)

E - Subsumption on a higher hierarchical level

F - Derivation (by spatial relations)

G - No mapping

Semantic Harmonisation- categories -

=

(A: ATKIS; Z: ZABAGED)



Semantic Harmonisation- matching example I -

category C - overlap



Semantic Harmonisation- matching example II -

differences in classification (object types)

multiple mappings

category B – superset (Z is part of A)

category D – subset (A is part of Z)



Analysis of used mappings

Concepts with mapping functions

ATKIS > ZABAGED ca. 30 %

ZABAGED > ATKIS ca. 70 %

Frequency of categories

0

50

100

150

200

A B C D E F

Nu

mb

er

of

Map

pin

gs

Mapping Category

ZABAGED to ATKIS ATKIS to ZABAGED

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

1 2 3 4 5

Fre

qu

en

cy i

n %

Number of Single and Multiple Mappings

ATKIS to ZABAGED ZABAGED to ATKIS

multiple mappings (%)



Analysis of mappings for the datasets

Evaluation for testdata of the border region (mapping: ATKIS to ZABAGED for object types of „Tatsächliche Nutzung“)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

A B C D E F G

ATKIS combination combination in testdata

Number of combinations

Comparision of data model and testdata

Percentage of the categories in the testdata

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

A_41000

A_42000

A_43000

A_44000

A

B

C

D

E

F

G



Results overview


consistent coordinate reference system (ETRS89/UTM)

definition of a common border geometry

geometrically homogene geodata with connected cross-border objects



conceptual analysis of data models

mapping functions for shared use, visualisation and interpretation of the datasets in both models

specification by categories



Further information:

Sylvia Röhnert: [email protected]

Claudia Gedrange: [email protected]

Marco Neubert: [email protected]

Project Website: www.geodat.ioer.info

Thank you for your attention!

Technology

Roehnert ppt gi2011_cbh_v2_final