You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Yet, there are 3 points of contact between this new feature and OQAPI:
The result will be an enhanced LULC map. So similar to the Daylight map, we could become an "enhance LULC data provider". Yet, the need for such a service, its resource consumption (technical as well as labour) as well as its alignment with the existing osmlanduse-data service (@mcauer ) would need careful evaluation.
Our tool would benefit from a quality estimation for the OSM LULC data in a region. This way the trustworthiness in comparison to the ML model could lead to an improved combination.
Our tool could provide a quality estimation of OSM in comparison to a LULC ML model by calculating the disagreement between the two.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
The CA team is currently experimenting the possibility to combine OSM and RS data sources (https://gitlab.gistools.geog.uni-heidelberg.de/climate-action/lulc-utility/-/issues/51 and https://gitlab.gistools.geog.uni-heidelberg.de/climate-action/lulc-utility/-/merge_requests/38). Our first intuition is to go a similar pathway as https://gitlab.gistools.geog.uni-heidelberg.de/giscience/osmlanduse .
Yet, there are 3 points of contact between this new feature and OQAPI:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: