Back to all available

Automated area alignment of digitized cadastral maps: A GIS based approach using ground records

artificial-intelligence
computer-vision
data-mining-and-machine-learning
data-science
spatial-and-geographic-information-systems

Abstract

Area discrepancies frequently arise when scanned cadastral maps are digitized, resulting in mismatches between the actual land parcel sizes and their digital representations. This study presents a custom-built Python tool integrated within the ArcMap GIS environment to automatically rescale digitized cadastral parcels to match specified ground area values. The tool was designed to work directly with digitized parcel layers generated using ArcScan and allows users to input actual area values into a designated attribute field. It computes a per-parcel scaling factor and applies a uniform geometric transformation to adjust the parcel area accordingly. The output is a new shapefile in which each parcel aligns with its specified target area. This tool addresses an important need in cadastral data correction and offers a simple, efficient solution for improving the accuracy of land parcel data with real ground data.
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.
  • PeerJ Computer Science does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].