Positional Accuracy Improvement: a Comparative Study in Shanghai, China
Xiaohua Tong,Dan Liang,Gusheng Xu,Songlin Zhang
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13658816.2010.515948
2011-01-01
International Journal of Geographical Information Science
Abstract:With the rapid development of geospatial data capture technologies such as the Global Positioning System, more and higher accuracy data are now readily available to upgrade existing spatial datasets having lower accuracy using positional accuracy improvement (PAI) methods. Such methods may not achieve survey-accurate spatial datasets but can contribute to significant improvements in positional accuracy in a cost-effective manner. This article addresses a comparative study on PAI methods with applications to improve the spatial accuracy of the digital cadastral for Shanghai. Four critical issues are investigated: (1) the choice of improvement model in PAI adjustment; five PAI models are presented, namely the translation, scale and translation, similarity, affine, and second-order polynomial models; (2) the choice of estimation method in PAI adjustment; three estimation methods in PAI adjustment are proposed, namely the classical least squares (LS) adjustment, which assumes that only the observation vector contains error, the general least squares (GLS) adjustment, which regards both the ground and map coordinates of control points as observations with errors, and the total least squares (TLS) adjustment, which takes the errors in both the observation vector and the design matrix into account; (3) the impact of the configuration of ground control points (GCPs) on the result of PAI adjustment; 12 scenarios of GCP configurations are tested, including different numbers and distributions of GCPs; and (4) the deformation of geometric shape by the above-mentioned transformation models is presented in terms of area and perimeter. The empirical experiment results for six test blocks in Shanghai demonstrated the following. (1) The translation model hardly improves the positional accuracy because it accounts only for the shift error within digital datasets. The other four models (i.e., the scale and translation, similarity, affine, and second-order polynomial models) significantly improve the positional accuracy, which is assessed at checkpoints (CKPs) by calculating the difference between the updated coordinates transformed from the map coordinates and the surveyed coordinates. On the basis of the refined Akaike information criterion, the two best optimal transformation models for PAI are determined as the scale and translation and affine transformation models. (2) The weighted sum of square errors obtained using the GLS and TLS methods are much less than those obtained using the classical least squares method. The result indicates that both the GLS and TLS estimation methods can achieve greater reliability and accuracy in PAI adjustment. (3) The configuration of GCPs has a considerable effect on the result of PAI adjustment. Thus, an optimal configuration scheme of GCPs is determined to obtain the highest positional accuracy in the study area. (4) Compared with the deformations of geometric shapes caused by the transformation models, the scale and translation model is found to be the best model for the study area.