Final Review of the 2004 NAIP Digital Orthoimagery of Texas NAIP DOQ November 10, 2005 Gordon Wells and Linda Prosperie UT Center for Space Research.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
2008 NAIP Orthoimagery Update Chris Cialek MN Land Management Information Center May 7, 2008.
Advertisements

The Farm Service Agencys National Agricultural Imagery Program (NAIP) Presentation for the U. S. Geological Survey Eastern Region Geography State Cooperators.
1. Problem addressed Real-life websites usually show less-than- perfect accessibility — even those that strive to be accessible. WCAG Techniques and Failures.
NAIP 2010 Presentation Topics Changes for 2010 Partnership Information Delivery Systems Format of Deliverables Reporting Problems/Issues Support Question.
© 2013 IBM Corporation Tivoli and Maximo Quality Improvement Initiatives March 2014.
PROBABILISTIC ASSESSMENT OF THE QSAR APPLICATION DOMAIN Nina Jeliazkova 1, Joanna Jaworska 2 (1) IPP, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia, Bulgaria (2)
U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Aparajithan Sampath, Don Moe, Jon Christopherson, Greg Strensaas. ASPRS, April Geometric Evaluation.
NAIP Preview for FSA State Office GIS Specialists February 24, 2010 NAIP 2010.
Positional Accuracy February 15, 2006 Geog 458: Map Sources and Errors.
1 presented by: Tim Haithcoat University of Missouri Columbia QA/QC and Risk Management.
Measuring Accuracy of Street Centerline Datasets Donald Cooke Founder, GDT CLEM2001 August 6-7, 2001.
CARSI & DOITT Co-operative NYCMap Maintenance & Enhancement.
Chapter 11 Quality Control.
Obtaining LiDAR Data, Contracting Considerations Kenny Legleiter Project Manager Merrick & Company.
WMO UNEP INTERGOVERNMENTAL PANEL ON CLIMATE CHANGE NATIONAL GREENHOUSE GAS INVENTORIES PROGRAMME WMO UNEP IPCC Good Practice Guidance Simon Eggleston Technical.
A Statistically Valid Method for Using FIA Plots to Guide Spectral Class Rejection in Producing Stratification Maps Mike Hoppus & Andrew Lister USDA-Forest.
ESRI GIS Software. Contents Data Types –ESRI Data Model –Shapefiles –Raster Data Digital Orthophoto Quadrangle Digital Elevation Model Digital Raster.
Partnership Program for Spring Leaf-Off Imagery March 7, 2012.
Minnesota Elevation Mapping Project Metro Area Collect 1/13/2011 Tim Loesch Minnesota Department of Natural Resources.
USDA Planning Meeting December 5, 2005 NAIP 2005 INSPECTION PROCESS Zack Adkins, Joan Biediger, Mary Carlson NAIP Inspection Team USDA-FSA-APFO.
Ann Krogman Twin Cities Urban Lakes Project. Background Information… 100 lakes throughout the Twin Cities Metro Area Sampled in 2002 Land-use around each.
Shirley Hall GIS Program Manager Farm Service Agency Homeland Infrastructure Foundation – Level Data (HIFLD) Working Group Meeting.
2005 USDA Imagery Contracts May 4, 2005 NDOP Steering Committee Meeting Asheville, North Carolina W. Geoffrey Gabbott, Contracting Officer USDA, FSA, Aerial.
Accuracy and Maps Mike Ritchie, PE, PLS, PSM, CP President and CEO Photo Science.
Farm Service Agency National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP) Pecora Conference November 13, 2002 Denver, Colorado Kent Williams, USDA FSA Aerial Photography.
U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Geometric Assessment of Remote Sensed Data Oct Presented By: Michael Choate, SAIC U.S.
National Agriculture Imagery Program Potential Program Changes USDA Planning Meeting Salt Lake City, Utah December 4-6, 2006 Kent Williams NAIP Program.
Parameters Describing Earth Observing Remote Sensing Systems
7 th Grade- 2 nd Nine Weeks Review #1 Number Operations Order the following integers from least to greatest. 5, -13, 78, 0, -34, -3, 14 Algebra Bill is.
Hurricane Katrina Damage Analysis Alex Stern and William Tran.
Andrea Ryan.  “Persistently high salinity concentrations severely inhibit[s] the function of the Nueces Delta” (Dunton et al).  Data Collection for.
Spring Leaf-Off Imagery for Minnesota July 1, 2010.
Change Detection in the Metro Area Michelle Cummings Laura Cossette.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Jack O’Connell, State Superintendent of Public Instruction Results of the 2005 National Assessment of Educational Progress.
Coordination of Indiana GIS through dissemination of data and data products, education and outreach, adoption of standards, and building partnerships IGIC.
FIND THE UNIT RATE 9000 tickets 6 hours. FIND THE UNIT RATE 240 tickets = x tickets hour minute.
Update Cycle RFP Closed on September 24 th Image Capture Split Between 2009 and 2011 –Eastern Half of State Will Be Captured.
11/19/20081 NAIP 2008: Issues and Enhancements Zack Adkins NAIP 2008 Post Mortem November 19, 2008.
Geometry 9-6 Geometric Probability. Example Find the probability that a point chosen randomly in the rectangle will be: Inside the square. 20 ft 10 ft.
3/26/20081 Geospatial Data and the APFO: Past, Present, and Future Zack Adkins, Cartographer Civil Commercial Imagery Evaluation Workshop March 25-27,
Texture Metric Comparison of Manual Forest Stand Delineation and Image Segmentation Richard M. Warnick, Ken Brewer, Kevin Megown, Mark Finco, and Brian.
USDA Geospatial Data Warehouse NCGC Data Center 15 TB Online Data Bi-directional Data Replication and Failover for Business Continuity Data Themes: NAIP.
Verification and Validation Assuring that a software system meets a user's needs.
0 Spatial Characterization Edge Target Commercial Satellite Radiometric Tarps Spectroradiometer Method: Utilize edge targets (tarps, SSC concrete edge.
NAIP 2010 Presentation to National States Geographic Information Council Kent Williams USDA Farm Service Agency Aerial Photography Field Office (APFO )
Application of spatial autocorrelation analysis in determining optimal classification method and detecting land cover change from remotely sensed data.
Computer and Robot Vision II Chapter 20 Accuracy Presented by: 傅楸善 & 王林農 指導教授 : 傅楸善 博士.
Lecture PowerPoint Slides Basic Practice of Statistics 7 th Edition.
How to detect the change of model for fitting. 2 dimensional polynomial 3 dimensional polynomial Prepare for simple model (for example, 2D polynomial.
NAIP 2011 Presentation for NSGIC NAIP 2011 Presentation for FSA State GIS Specialists August 31, 2010.
1 National Standard for Spatial Data Accuracy Missoula GIS Coffee Talk and MT GPS Users Group Julie Binder Maitra March 17, 2006.
The Impact of Urbanization In Austin Texas and Surrounding Counties An analysis of land use and development Bryant Chambers University of Texas, Austin.
USDA/FSA Service Center - GIS Implementation Implementation Strategy: Provide best starting point for digitizing field boundaries Quality Assured User.
Coordination of Indiana GIS through dissemination of data and data products, education and outreach, adoption of standards, and building partnerships Current.
By: Reid Swanson Sam Soper. Goal: To describe land cover/use changes that have occurred in the Twin Cities Metro-Area from the 1991 to 2005 Quantifying.
ULTRASONIC PHASED ARRAYS TESTING. ULTRASONIC PHASED ARRAYS  Use a multiple element probe  Output pulse from each element is time delayed to produce.
26. Classification Accuracy Assessment
Sioux Falls Geometric Test Range: Evaluation and Application
ArcGIS Data Reviewer: Assessing Positional Accuracy
2014 School Performance Grades
STATISTICAL TOOLS FOR AUDITING
IP v6 Address Space four time the # of bits as v4 # of addresses:
REMOTE SENSING ANALYSIS OF URBAN SPRAWL IN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA:
ArcGIS Data Reviewer: Plans for Quality Assessment of Raster Datasets
Town of South Kingstown Healthy Places by Design
G16 vs. G17 IR Inter-comparison: Some Experiences and Lessons from validation toward GEO-GEO Inter-calibration Fangfang Yu, Xiangqian Wu, Hyelim Yoo and.
Problem Solving in Geometry with Proportions
Adding variables. There is a difference between assessing the statistical significance of a variable acting alone and a variable being added to a model.
Computer Vision II Chapter 20 Accuracy
WV GIS Technical Center
Presentation transcript:

Final Review of the 2004 NAIP Digital Orthoimagery of Texas NAIP DOQ November 10, 2005 Gordon Wells and Linda Prosperie UT Center for Space Research

NAIP QA Assessment Procedures Phase 1. Comprehensive review of all MrSID County Mosaics Four Operators inspected: 1 geometry checkpoint per 7.5-minute quad (64 square miles) Noted all radiometric errors and cloud cover Phase 2. Selective review of quarter-quad GeoTIFFs Four Operators inspected: All geometric errors >7 m detected during Phase 1 A random selection of additional quarter-quad GeoTIFFs Noted all radiometric errors and cloud cover

Points QQs Percent of QQs County Mosaics GeoTIFF Quarter-Quads Total NAIP QA/QC All Checkpoints

GeoTIFF Quarter-Quad points 989 GeoTIFF Quarter_Quads 989 NAIP QA/QC GeoTIFF Checkpoints

NAIP QA/QC All GeoTIFFs Mean Displacement Median Displacement Mosaics Mosaics + All GeoTIFFs Random GeoTIFFs Mean and Median Displacement

Mosaics Random GeoTIFFs XRMS YRMS Radial Circular RMSE Error All GeoTIFFs Mosaics + All GeoTIFFs NAIP QA/QC Accuracy Statistics

1:4800 1” = 400’ 1:6000 1” = 500’ 1: ” = 1000’ 1:2400 1” = 200’ 4.05 m 5.09 m m 2.04 m 4.60 m 5.79 m m 2.32 m 2.44 m 3.35 m 6.71 m 1.34 m Map Scale NMAS Circular Error NSSDA Radial Accuracy NSSDA Radial RMSE National Accuracy Standards

1:4800 1” = 400’ 1:6000 1” = 500’ 1: ” = 1000’ 1:2400 1” = 200’ 4.05 m 5.09 m m 2.04 m 4.60 m 5.79 m m 2.32 m 2.44 m 3.35 m 6.71 m 1.34 m Map Scale NMAS Circular Error NSSDA Radial Accuracy NSSDA Radial RMSE Texas NAIP 4.91 m5.62 m3.23 m Texas NAIP & Accuracy Standards

NAIP QA/QC Quarter-Quads with Clouds 731 or 4.12%

NAIP QA/QC Quarter-Quads With >10% Clouds 88 or 0.496%

NAIP QA/QC Quarter-Quads With Other Defects Mosaics 274 GeoTIFFs 316 Less Overlap 97 Total 483

NAIP QA/QC Defects other than Clouds

NAIP Anomaly Specular Reflection

NAIP Anomaly Boeing 737

Summary Geometric Accuracy is high. 14 of 7015 points checked (0.2%) failed. Extrapolates to <40 quarter-quads in the state. Cloud Cover is a factor. Impacts 731 quarter-quads (4.12%). By specification, causes rejection of 88 quarter quads (0.5%). Radiometric Flaws need to be addressed. Impacts 483 quarter-quads (2.72%). Severe instances would likely cause rejection of approximately 100 quarter-quads (0.6%).