4 ms·

Again, I wouldn't be philosophical about "When modifying or removing work that humans did, I'm much more hesitant." If a robotic system can demonstrate some hi

Again, I wouldn't be philosophical about "When modifying or removing work that humans did, I'm much more hesitant." If a robotic system can demonstrate some high bar of precision in modifying human updates, then let the edits happen. If a human mapped a road, then that road changed places or perhaps changed from being two-way to one-way and a robot can detect that reliably, let the robot edit. That said, I don't think "robots changing human edits" is where the robots shine. Most human edits will be good, unless the data later changes. I agree that the low hanging fruit is 1) mapping new features, 2) cleaning up imports like TIGER, 3) providing "lint" type tools to give human editors feedback if their new edit might be wrong.

maxerickson 10y ago
I'm curious how the lint aspect of DeepOSM will work in areas that have less room for improvement than the areas I looked at in Delaware and Maine. In those areas, the imported TIGER data is poor enough that a road by road analysis is overkill. The DeepOSM output flagged most of the roads. Given the capacity to run it, an interesting analysis would be an evaluation of the entire United States, maybe grouped by county or so. Then people in well mapped cities looking for a project could improve the worst county in their state, or the worst county in the US, etc.
manarth 10y ago
> "Most human edits will be good, unless the data later changes" One concern is the date of the bot's data-source/satellite imagery. - Bot reviews satellite data, creates building. - Human notices that the building's actually been demolished, so removes it from OSM. - Bot reviews satellite data, recreates building. When I was in Georgia (the Eurasian country, not the USA state) in 2014, I was making changes to OSM and noticed that the satellite imagery was very different to what was on the ground. I couldn't find any way to work out how old the satellite data was, but my gut feel is that there will be some places where the pace of development is much faster than the rate of updates in satellite imagery.

maxerickson 10y ago

I'm curious how the lint aspect of DeepOSM will work in areas that have less room for improvement than the areas I looked at in Delaware and Maine. In those areas, the imported TIGER data is poor enough that a road by road analysis is overkill. The DeepOSM output flagged most of the roads. Given the capacity to run it, an interesting analysis would be an evaluation of the entire United States, maybe grouped by county or so. Then people in well mapped cities looking for a project could improve the worst county in their state, or the worst county in the US, etc.

manarth 10y ago

> "Most human edits will be good, unless the data later changes" One concern is the date of the bot's data-source/satellite imagery. - Bot reviews satellite data, creates building. - Human notices that the building's actually been demolished, so removes it from OSM. - Bot reviews satellite data, recreates building. When I was in Georgia (the Eurasian country, not the USA state) in 2014, I was making changes to OSM and noticed that the satellite imagery was very different to what was on the ground. I couldn't find any way to work out how old the satellite data was, but my gut feel is that there will be some places where the pace of development is much faster than the rate of updates in satellite imagery.