Comparative evaluation and analysis of online geocoding services

Duangduen Roongpiboonsopit · Hassan A. Karimi

76 citations0/0 files storedInternational Journal of Geographical Information Systems

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Geographic Information Systems Studies 3D Modeling in Geospatial Applications Data Quality and Management

Abstract

Geocoding is an uncertain process that associates an address or a place name with geographic coordinates. Traditionally, geocoding is performed locally on a stand-alone computer with the geocoding tools usually bundled in GIS software packages. The use of such tools requires skillful operators who know about the issues of geocoding, that is, reference databases and complicated geocoding interpolation techniques. These days, with the advancement in the Internet and Web services technologies, online geocoding provides its functionality to the Internet users with ease; thus, they are often unaware of such issues. With an increasing number of online geocoding services, which differ in their reference databases, the geocoding algorithms, and the strategy for dealing with inputs and outputs, it is crucial for the service requestors to realize the quality of the geocoded results of each service before choosing one for their applications. This is primarily because any errors associated with the geocoded addresses will be propagated to subsequent decisions, activities, modeling, and analysis. This article examines the quality of five online geocoding services: Geocoder.us, Google, MapPoint, MapQuest, and Yahoo!. The quality of each geocoding service is evaluated with three metrics: match rate, positional accuracy, and similarity. A set of addresses from the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) database were used as a baseline. The results were statistically analyzed with respect to different location characteristics. The outcome of this study reveals the differences among the online geocoding services on the quality of their geocoding results and it can be used as a general guideline for selecting a suitable service that matches an application's needs.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 76 citations exist upstream.

References

2011Geographic information systems and science 2005Geographic information systems and science 2003Positional error in automated geocoding of residential addresses 2008A comparison of address point, parcel and street geocoding techniques 2007From Text to Geographic Coordinates: The Current State of Geocoding 2005Positional Accuracy of Two Methods of Geocoding 1995Address Matching: GIS Technology for Mapping Human Activity Patterns

Cited by

2018Mining Twitter Data for Improved Understanding of Disaster Resilience 2018A spatio-temporal kernel density estimation framework for predictive crime hotspot mapping and evaluation 2011Neighborhood disparities in stroke and myocardial infarction mortality: a GIS and spatial scan statistics approach 2014Built environment attributes related to GPS measured active trips in mid-life and older adults with mobility disabilities 2013Accuracy and privacy aspects in free online reverse geocoding services 2016Using an Optimized Chinese Address Matching Method to Develop a Geocoding Service: A Case Study of Shenzhen, China

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.