Special Topics in GIS Lab 4 Blog Post 4

 I struggled a lot with this lab because of tools not seeming to want to work for me when I tried to use them, specifically on parts B and D, however I still feel like I was able to learn a lot about elevation data models. If I could have gotten part B to work that would have been really cool to see how GIS can be used to find ski run suitability. I really enjoy when we get to do labs that we then apply to real world situations. The image I decided to include was the one from part C exploring TINs. This one I found interesting because of all the different things we can add to the map in order to show the information that we want to show. For example, adding the contour lines in order to help show elevation. All in all I feel as though this would have been a very interesting and fun lab if I had been able to get the tools to work and did not have a hurricane breathing down my neck forcing me to rush my way through my troubleshooting process.

Special Topics in GIS Lab 3 Blog Post 3

 The goal of this assessment was to determine which project between the two shapefiles given had more complete data. First I clipped the centerlines and tiger shapefiles to the grid shapefile in order to break the roads up. Then I used the intersect tool to pair each clipped section with the grid that they were clipped to. I then used the tabulate intersection tool in order to calculate the length of each section of road in order to find out which one was more complete. I merged the two intersected layers and added the percent difference data that I solved by using the formula provided. Lastly, I joined the percent difference data with the merged layer and symbolized the map as a choropleth map.

Special Topics in GIS Lab 2 Blog Post 2

 

This is a screenshot of my test points for the ABQ Layer.

In order to get the horizontal accuracy statements for both layers I ordered the data from smallest to largest based off of the horizontal axis error. Then, in order to get the 95% precision confidence number, I multiplied 20 by .95 and got 19. I then took the average of the values at the 19th and 20th slots and that was the number I used for my accuracy statements.

These are my accuracy statements:

ABQ Layer:

Positional Accuracy: Tested 1.78 meters horizontal accuracy at 95% confidence level.

Street Map Layer:

Positional Accuracy: Tested 161.78 meters horizontal accuracy at 95% confidence level.