GeoDirectory in Limerick City Council - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – GeoDirectory in Limerick City Council PowerPoint presentation | free to view - id: 171752-ZDc1Z



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

GeoDirectory in Limerick City Council

Description:

GEOADDRESS 7 HILLARY CLOSE ABBEYFEALE LIMERICK (Source) Mscore 4 (No. ... MTH HILLARY CLOSE (Missing 'Thoroughfare' Elements) MSTH (Mising 'Secondary' Elements) ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:63
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 27
Provided by: NetworkAdm95
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: GeoDirectory in Limerick City Council


1
GeoDirectory in Limerick City Council
Jason Murphy Gresham Hotel 22nd November 2007
Over 40 of the buildings in the state have a
non-unique address
(ComReg, Report on Postcodes, 2005)
2
Content
  • Context
  • What we have learned
  • What we have achieved to date
  • The Possibilities Considerations
  • Questions

The sheer diversity of databases has hampered
data integration (Higgs and Martin, 1995)
3
National Context
  • Multiple Functions in Local Authority
  • Disparate Databases (and Apps)
  • Possibilities for Address DB Standardisation
    (semantic)
  • Client, Property, Area-Centric Options
  • 1998 GeoDirectory Standardised and Current.
  • Tools of the Local Authority/ LGCSB/ wider
    industry partners
  • RESEARCH Identify a Benchmark

4
Why Consider the Topic?
  • In the context of BLG improved data quality can
    improve customer interactions, reducing costs
    and streamlining the decision making process
    (Redman, 1996)
  • Raise the topic of integration for debate and
    further consideration.
  • Barr (2002) refers to the property-centric
    database as the No-Go-Zone Particularly
    relevant in terms of GeoDirectory and Irish LAs.

5
Outline of Research
  • 30 Stratified random sample of the Register of
    Electors
  • 40,000 Records, 173 EDs
  • An initial geo-coding run against GeoDirectory
  • Use of standard LA tools.
  • A Data grooming exercise
  • removing inconsistencies and errors (Galdardas
    et al, 2001)
  • Second geo-coding run
  • Analysis the matched and mismatched.

6
Practicalities of the Research
  • The aim was not in itself to achieve the perfect
    match rate but rather to gain a better
    understanding of the dynamic of integration.
  • This approach represents one of many possible
    ways of analysing the dynamic and quantifying the
    result
  • Not definitive
  • Not without limitations

7
STUDY AREA
8
Address-Match Algorithm Mismatch Assessment
  • Purpose To find a best match and to identify
    missing Thoroughfare, Secondary Locality
    elements. (T, S L)
  • All records given a score based on the number
    of delimited string elements.
  • Each and every record from the sample compared to
    every record from GeoDirectory and best match
    identified.
  • The related T, S L records were passed back to
    the sample address to confirm their existence.

9
GeoAddress Sample
  • Register 7 Hilary Close Abbeyfeale Limerick
    (Target Address)
  • dedwrd_id 1
  • dedwrd_name Abbeyfeale
  • BUILDING_ID 80845731
  • ADDRESS_POINT_ID 0
  • GEOADDRESS 7 HILLARY CLOSE ABBEYFEALE LIMERICK
    (Source)
  • Mscore 4
    (No. Matching address elements)
  • RegScore 5
    (Count value for Target Address elements)
  • GeoScore 5
    (Count value for Source Address elements)
  • MTH HILLARY CLOSE (Missing "Thoroughfare"
    Elements)
  • MSTH (Mising "Secondary" Elements)
  • MLOC (Mising "Locality" Elements)

10
Actual Findings
  • Match Rates Before Grooming (6.6)
  • City 37 County 5.2 (Limitations)
  • Match Rates after Basic Grooming (17)
  • 10 Point Increase.
  • Not 40 but Closer to 20 Non-Unique In this
    study
  • Further Grooming based on knowledge of local
    semantics 38
  • Also using a Bounding File (ED)
  • GAMMA Soundex Matching 53, Interactive 74

?
11
What does this mean
  • Semantics understand your data
  • Look-up tables
  • Address matching Algorithm
  • Interactive GeoCoding
  • Point of Entry -- Address and/or Map

For Any Address Matching Exercise one Table has
to set the standard.
12
Primary Reasons for a Failure to GeoCode
  • Non-Unique Addresses
  • Incomplete Address (missing elements)
  • Various spellings descriptions within LA
    Database
  • Inclusion of Unit Numbers Apts etc
  • Abbreviations, punctuation, fàda (à).
  • Localised spelling versus GeoDirectory
  • Additional Noise in the Address file
  • Ambiguous Addresses
  • Impossible Addresses (1 Dead Letter, Dublin 6E,
    Ireland)

When it comes to cleaning or editing data, there
is little formal guidance (Leahy,2004)
13
RESIDENTS PARKING PERMITS
Thoroughfare
14
Address Model
15
(No Transcript)
16
(No Transcript)
17
(No Transcript)
18
(No Transcript)
19
(No Transcript)
20
(No Transcript)
21
(No Transcript)
22
(No Transcript)
23
ADDRESS DATABASE OPTION
Address Matching
24
(No Transcript)
25
Joined-Up
Library Services/ Membership
HOME
Waste Permists
Fire Safety Certificates
Waiver Schemes
Other Grant Schemes
Commencement Notices
Contributions
Customer Relationship Management
HEG
Residents Parking Permits
Register of Electors
Litter Fines
Rates Commercial and Other
Derelict Sites
Rental Accommodation Schemes
Parking Fines
Road Openings
26
Considerations
  • Non-Unique - Cater for In Software.
  • Independent Applications (HOME/RAS etc)
  • Non-Existent Addresses Feedback to GeoDirectory
  • Alias
  • Data Protection
About PowerShow.com