1 / 25

CyberGIS Progress and Perspectives in the Context of USGS

CyberGIS Progress and Perspectives in the Context of USGS . E. Lynn Usery. usery@usgs.gov. http://cegis.usgs.gov. Outline. USGS needs for CyberGIS The National Map and other USGS datasets Progress to date Perspective for the future of CyberGIS at USGS 3DEP Alaska

london
Download Presentation

CyberGIS Progress and Perspectives in the Context of USGS

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. CyberGIS Progress and Perspectives in the Context of USGS E. Lynn Usery usery@usgs.gov http://cegis.usgs.gov

  2. Outline • USGS needs for CyberGIS • The National Map and other USGS datasets • Progress to date • Perspective for the future of CyberGIS at USGS • 3DEP • Alaska • Maps and analysis on demand • Some example problems for CyberGIS • Conclusions

  3. USGS Needs for CyberGIS • Multiple nationwide datasets at high resolution • Complex calculations for geospatial data • Integration of multiple datasets • Creating Resource Description Framework (RDF) and semantics from legacy USGS datasets in geodatabase and image formats

  4. Current State • Layer-based approach • Generation of new topographic maps – US Topo • 3 year cycle; 18,000 maps per year, 100 maps per day • Viewer access with display, download, mashups with other data • Problems – rapid display and delivery; relies on tile cache scheme • Uses single CPU computer technology

  5. The 8 Layers of The National Map

  6. Datasets of The National Map • National Land Cover Dataset (1992, 2000, 2006, 2011 in work) • National Elevation Dataset (1,1/3,1/9 arc-sec) • National Digital Orthophoto Dataset (multiple dates, multiple resolutions, 1 m, 1/3 m urban areas) • National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) (Medium, High, Local resolution) • Geographic Names Information System (GNIS) • National Structures Dataset • National Boundaries Dataset (US, state, county, minor civil divisions, governmental units) • National Transportation Dataset (TIGER and others)

  7. Progress to date – Focus on complex computation for map projections • pRasterBlaster development continuing • pRasterBlaster Version 1.0 released 01 April 2012 • Identified two substantive I/O bottlenecks • pRasterBlaster Version 1.5 soon (fix identified bottlenecks; parallel I/O Library) • Iterative testing • mapIMG 4.0 (dRasterBlaster -- to be released this fall) • Library of core functions shared by both dRasterBlaster & pRasterBlaster (libRasterBlaster -- almost complete)

  8. Progress to date – Data Availability for CyberGIS • National Elevation Dataset • Current 10 m resolution available for access through cyberGIS

  9. Perspective for the future of CyberGIS at USGS • National Enhanced Elevation Assessment (NEAA) • http://nationalmap.gov/3DEP/neea.html • The results of the assessment indicate that a national-level enhanced-elevation-data program has the potential to generate from $1.2 billion to $13 billion in new benefits annually. • Review of and feedback on 3DEP: program recommendation of Quality Level 2 data and 8 year cycle

  10. NEEA Quality Levels

  11. Current Status of the Nation’s Elevation Data NEEA Inventory Results Map depicts public sources of LiDAR in all states plus IfSAR data in Alaska 1996 -2011 28% coverage -49 states 15% coverage –Alaska 30+ year replacement cycle Program is well coordinated –less than 10% overlap of coverage Data quality variable Why is this a problem? Remaining 72% coverage is 30 or more years old. Alaska –very poor quality Meets 10% of reported needs Current and emerging needs require higher quality data

  12. 3DEP – 3-Dimensional Elevation Program • New program result of NEAA • Trying to get support from multiple Federal and State agencies to produce nationwide coverage • Communicate that the program is more than bare earth elevation –point cloud and other basic derivatives (TBD) will be distributed and archived • 3DEP gives you the perspective to see more than just what’s on the surface

  13. United States Interagency Elevation Inventory   • Joint project of USGS, NOAA, and FEMA • http://www.csc.noaa.gov/inventory/#

  14. Alaska Mapping • Mapping Alaska at 1:24,000 (or 1:25,000) scale • State wide SPOT images (2.5 m resolution) are being acquired • Statewide IfSar at 5 m post spacing are being acquired • The National Geospatial Program begins map production in FY 2013 (400 maps planned) • Limited to producing maps where SPOT and IfSar are available

  15. Alaska Mapping Problems • Hydrography • Current National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) from • 1:63,360 scale cannot be used • Generate hydrography from IfSar; match to images • Transportation • No current source; some availability from Census, Open Street Map, and commercial contract • Names – standard and variants; need sources • Boundaries – multiple conflicting sources • Land cover – from National Land Cover Dataset

  16. Maps and Analysis On Demand • Currently use 7.5 min quadrangles • Need to provide user any arbitrary area by name (county for example), user specified area (polygon) • Major shift to realtime processing of requested areas • Not work with current production of over 100 maps per day using GIS software

  17. Some Example Problems – Data Generation • Hydrography from IfSar and 3DEP • Identify geomorphic features for entire United States from current NED or 3DEP when available and images • One possible approach: Use Ontology Design Patterns, geomorphic, and spectral signatures with neural net or other classifiers • Example: craters • Preprocessing for generalization of hydrography and transportation

  18. Some Example Problems Data Conversion and Delivery • Massively parallel conversion of legacy geospatial databases to RDF • Examples for automatic conversion that require high performance computing: NHD, NTD, NBD, NSD • Feature identification and conversion from raster datasets: elevation, imagery, land cover • Tile caching for viewer • Moving data to cloud and delivery will be from there

  19. Some Example Problems – Science Applications • Extract hydrography from lidar in 3DEP; match to current NHD to find problems; add streams found from extraction that are not in current NHD: supports water modeling applications • Data integration of The National Map with other USGS nationwide datasets • Magnetic, gravity, and geologic data • Similar integration with water and biologic datasets

  20. Some Example Problems – Science Applications • Geospatial data integration for intermediate economic resiliency modeling • Integration of geospatial data and its derivatives with cultural, transportation, infrastructure and economic data to model urban supply chains • Integration of natural hazard, meteorological, hydrologic data and natural disaster data of model optimizing the resiliency of supply chain elements

  21. Conclusions • USGS geospatial and map databases can benefit from CyberGIS for production applications • Potential for new science with cyberGIS using nationwide high resolution datasets processed as single units

  22. CyberGIS Progress and Perspectives in the Context of USGS E. Lynn Usery usery@usgs.gov http://cegis.usgs.gov

More Related