Evaluation of Openstreetmap Indonesia Geospatial Data: Samarinda and Balikpapan
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Evaluation of OpenStreetMap Indonesia Geospatial Data: Samarinda and Balikpapan Yayasan Bumi & Center of Borneo Environmental Remote Sensing, University of Mulawarman March 2016 Evaluation of OpenStreetMap Indonesia Geospatial Data Final Report March 2016 Yayasan Bumi & Center of Borneo Environmental Remote Sensing, University of Mulawarman Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT) Project Team Principal Investigator : Y Budi Sulistioadi, Ph.D Co-PI : Ali Suhardiman, Ph.D Project Administrator : Adi Supriadi, M.Si Field Team : Chaidir Arsyan Adlan, S.Si Seftiawan Samsu Rijal, M.Sc Wisnu Kinanjar Azis Anjari Yayasan Bumi In Center of Borneo Environmental Remote Sensing Jl. Suwandi I No 72 RT 24 collaboration University of Mulawarman Samarinda, Indonesia with Jl. Krayan, Gedung Pasca Sarjana Pertanian Lt 4, Tel: (0541) 748163 Samarinda, Indonesia Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Evaluation of OpenStreetMap Indonesia Geospatial Data: Samarinda and Balikpapan (Yayasan Bumi & CeBEReS UNMUL) ii Abstract This project evaluates the quality of the geospatial data generated through the OpenStreetMap program for the cities of Samarinda and Balikpapan in East Kalimantan Province. The evaluation is conducted by comparing the geospatial data from the OpenStreetMap with the geometrically corrected very high resolution satellite imagery and the coordinate measurements conducted in the field using handheld Global Positioning System (GPS) receiver. The point features were evaluated by their attributes, while the line features were evaluated by their geometric accuracy against the referenced datasets. The polygon features were evaluated through a set of metrics, i.e. perimeter, extent, circularity ratio and the precision of their centroids. In general, the level of accuracy of the OpenStreetMap datasets for Samarinda and Balikpapan are good. There are some errors here and there, but for most cases, the percentage of point and line and polygon features with “high error” state never exceeds 29%. The metrics of the polygon features also show similar pattern and most of them were not significantly different. Considering this evaluation result, we encourage the OpenStreetMap program to regularly update the point and polygon geospatial datasets especially with current information such as business status and update the geometry of the line features to match with the large scale municipal topographic maps or very high resolution satellite imagery. Evaluation of OpenStreetMap Indonesia Geospatial Data: Samarinda and Balikpapan (Yayasan Bumi & CeBEReS UNMUL) iii Table of Contents Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iii Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................... iv List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. vi List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... vii List of Appendices ........................................................................................................................ vii 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1. Background .......................................................................................................................... 1 1.2. Objectives ............................................................................................................................ 1 1.3. Methodology ........................................................................................................................ 1 1.3.1. Technical Terms............................................................................................................ 2 1.3.2. Evaluating the OpenStreetMap Geospatial Data .......................................................... 2 2. Project Implementations ............................................................................................................. 4 2.1. OpenStreetMap Datasets and Geographic Boundaries ........................................................ 4 2.2. Sample Pre-Screening .......................................................................................................... 5 2.3. Sampling Design .................................................................................................................. 6 2.4. Generating Random Sample ................................................................................................ 6 2.5. Uploading Samples to the GPS Receiver............................................................................. 7 2.6. The Use of Very High-Resolution Imagery ......................................................................... 7 2.7. Validation Process ............................................................................................................... 7 2.8. Decision on the General Level of Accuracy ........................................................................ 8 3. Project Results ............................................................................................................................ 9 3.1. Samarinda ............................................................................................................................ 9 3.1.1. Point Datasets................................................................................................................ 9 3.1.2. Line Datasets ................................................................................................................. 9 3.1.3. Polygon Datasets ......................................................................................................... 10 3.1.4. Extraordinary Cases .................................................................................................... 13 3.2. Balikpapan ......................................................................................................................... 16 3.2.1. Point Datasets.............................................................................................................. 16 3.2.2. Line Datasets ............................................................................................................... 16 Evaluation of OpenStreetMap Indonesia Geospatial Data: Samarinda and Balikpapan (Yayasan Bumi & CeBEReS UNMUL) iv 3.2.3. Extraordinary Cases for Line Datasets of Balikpapan ................................................ 17 3.2.4. Polygon Datasets ......................................................................................................... 17 4. General Level of Accuracy ....................................................................................................... 22 4.1. Samarinda .......................................................................................................................... 22 4.2. Balikpapan ......................................................................................................................... 22 4.3. Recommendation ............................................................................................................... 23 Appendices .................................................................................................................................... 24 Evaluation of OpenStreetMap Indonesia Geospatial Data: Samarinda and Balikpapan (Yayasan Bumi & CeBEReS UNMUL) v List of Tables Table 1. Technical terms used in this project .............................................................................. 2 Table 2. Metrics calculated to support evaluation of the OpenStreetMap geospatial datasets ... 2 Table 3. Geographic Boundaries of the OpenStreetMap Geospatial Datasets Evaluated for this project ........................................................................................................................... 4 Table 4. The Number of Pre-Screened and Total Samples for the City of Samarinda ............... 5 Table 5. The Number of Samples ............................................................................................... 6 Table 6. Number and percentage of correct and incorrect attributes of point dataset for Samarinda ..................................................................................................................... 9 Table 7. Error levels of the OpenStreetMap line dataset for Samarinda (in meters) .................. 9 Table 8. t-test results between the pairs of GPS vs RS, GPS vs OSM, and RS vs OSM generated geospatial data for polygon extent for Samarinda ...................................... 11 Table 9. t-test results between the pairs of GPS vs RS, GPS vs OSM, and RS vs OSM generated geospatial data for polygon perimeter of Samarinda.................................. 11 Table 10. t-test results between the pairs of GPS vs RS, GPS vs OSM, and RS vs OSM generated geospatial data for polygon circularity ratio for Samarinda City ............... 12 Table 11. t-test results between the distance from the RS generated and GPS measured polygon centroids to OpenStreetMap polygon centroids for Samarinda .................................. 13 Table 12. Extraordinary cases of polygon features with high error in Samarinda...................... 14 Table 13. Mean and maximum