Cartographic Projection
every map is wrong, and by exactly how much
Concept

Conditioning — where it appears

How sharply a fitted quantity is determined by the observations, and therefore how far it can be moved without any of them noticing. Two published parameter sets can differ in every number and produce the same transformation, which is what a badly conditioned fit looks like from outside.

Named by 8 essays across 3 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

How badly two arcs determine the flattening. The reciprocal flattening recovered by inverting two measured degree lengths, at 1.5° and 66.33°, against an error introduced into the equatorial one. The exact pair returns 298.26. Ten metres of error — 90 parts per million of a 110-kilometre arc — returns 301.5, and the relative error in the flattening is 118 times the relative error in the arc. At 1000 metres the inversion returns a negative flattening: an Earth longer through the poles than across the equator, which is the answer the Paris Observatory defended for a generation.

The figure of the Earth was measured

Two expeditions went to Lapland and Peru to measure the length of a degree of latitude, and the whole signal separating a flattened Earth from a round one is a kilometre in a hundred and eleven. Inverting two arcs amplifies their error by 118 — and a kilometre of error returns a lemon-shaped planet.

datums · Ellipsoid Two parameter sets 100 metres apart, over the region they were fitted to. Each marker is drawn at a size proportional to how far the two transformations put it apart. The second set differs from the first by 100 metres of translation along the direction this network can least see, with the rotations and the scale re-fitted to absorb it — which is what a second agency's adjustment does when it chooses a different constraint. The worst disagreement anywhere in the region is 5.64 metres and the mean is 3.61. Applied at south-eastern Australia the same two sets differ by 193 metres, because the rotation that absorbed the translation here is a rotation of the whole Earth.

Two parameter sets, one transformation

Agencies publish seven-parameter datum transformations that differ by hundreds of metres in translation, and the usual reading is that one of them is better. Over the region either was fitted to they are the same transformation: a hundred metres of translation, re-absorbed by the rotations and the scale, moves a British coordinate by 5.6 metres and an Australian one by 193.

datums · Datum What each configuration can see, and what it cannot. The smallest eigenvalue of the fit's own normal matrix — how much the residual changes for a unit move in the worst direction of parameter space — for three parameterised candidates against six configurations of the same size. A zero is not a hard fit: it is a direction the control points cannot see at all, so every value of the parameter along it gives an identical residual. 2 of 18 are at the floor of double precision, and they are not the ones a reader would guess. Where none is, the spread between the best and worst arrangement is still Infinity at a fixed point count.

Where the control points are

Five rungs fit a library to a map and ask how much to trust the winner. None asks whether the parameters are recoverable at all. On control points along one parallel an equirectangular's standard parallel is not merely hard to find — it is invisible, exactly, and five hundred and twelve points on the same parallel are as blind as eight.

wrong · Identify Believing a group takes away the redundancy that would test it. The thirteen degrees of freedom in this network, divided between the two groups, against the weight ratio the adjustment was told. At a ratio of a quarter the edges carry 12.1 of them and at sixteen they carry 0.07. A group's own variance can only be estimated from its own share, so a surveyor who is confident about an instrument has taken away the arithmetic that would have caught the confidence. The two curves sum to thirteen at every ratio, which is the identity that makes this a redistribution rather than a loss.

The weights are a guess the solve believes

Rung seven finds a decision inside the least-squares problem no residual can see: what to hold fixed. There is a second, made more often and thought about less. Every observation enters with a weight nobody measured, the weights move the coordinates by a factor of 1.8, and the standard check on them can be made to pass by a scaling that moves nothing at all.

practice · Reduction The same patch, pinned six ways. Two vertices have to be held or the conformal energy has a similarity's worth of null space. Which two turns out to decide two of the three numbers reported. The median angular deformation is the same to 8 per cent across all six — that is the map. The areal spread runs from 2.68 to 7.44, so the 3.07 reported for this body was a statement about its corners. And pinning two adjacent vertices, which fixes the similarity through a very short lever, ruins the worst point without touching the median: a badly conditioned constraint pays for its scale in one corner.

The map depends on where it was cut

The previous rung solved the discrete conformal equations on a triangulated body and reported an areal spread of 3.07, then recorded that the number might belong to the patch, the boundary and the two pinned vertices rather than to the surface. It belongs to the pins: hold a different pair and it runs from 2.68 to 7.44, while the typical angular deformation does not move at all.

datums · Bodies The solve's cost is a U in the shape; the curvature is not. Solid: how many conjugate-gradient steps the conformal solve needs, against the window's aspect ratio, at constant surface area. It has a minimum at the square window — 174 steps — and rises to 265 and 275 at the two extremes, which are elongated by the same factor in opposite directions. Dashed: the total Gaussian curvature the window encloses, on its own scale, which falls from 0.311 to -0.012 across the same sweep and is least at one end of it. The cost has its minimum where the window is square and the curvature has its minimum somewhere else, so whatever is making the solve expensive is not what is making the map spread.

A long window and a square one

Rung nine held the patch's area and found that where the cut goes still changes the map by a third, with the curvature it encloses predicting the change at r = 0.969. It recorded that it had held area and curvature and not shape. Sweeping the shape at constant area separates two things that had looked like one: the map is curvature and the cost is shape.

datums · Bodies What a seven-parameter fit's residual is made of. A published transformation accuracy is the root-mean-square residual at the common points, and here it is 1.51 metres. Almost all of it — 1.51 — is the network's own distortion, which a rigid motion and a scale cannot follow and which is present at every point of the country whether it was used in the fit or not. The transformation's own error, measured as the disagreement between the fitted parameters and the true ones over a clean grid, is 0.091 metres: 6 per cent of the quoted figure. The last bar is the control — the same fit with the distortion switched off, at 2.9e-4 metres.

What another common point buys

Rung three finds that a seven-parameter datum fit leaves a pattern rather than noise. Six per cent of the residual it reports is the transformation's own error and the other ninety-four is distortion no seven parameters can follow — so adding common points improves a term that was already small and cannot touch the one that is quoted.

datums · Datum Seven published numbers, twenty-eight actual ones. The correlation matrix of a seven-parameter fit to 64 common points over a region 9° across. Only the diagonal is ever published — seven standard deviations — and the twenty-one off-diagonal entries are not small: the strongest is ty against rx at 0.940. A translation and the rotation that mimics it over a small patch are very nearly the same parameter, so the fit cannot tell them apart and its errors in the two are locked together.

The parameters are not independent

Rung seven gives the seven parameters their own uncertainty and stops at seven numbers. There are twenty-eight, and the twenty-one nobody publishes are not small: a translation and the rotation that mimics it correlate at 0.94, the normal matrix has a condition number of 4 × 10¹⁶, and propagating from the diagonal alone overstates the transformation's uncertainty by up to a factor of thirty-six.

datums · Datum

Named alongside it

The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.

Least-squaresVerificationError budgetResidualHelmert transformationCommon pointConformalityDatumDegeneracyGeodetic datumIdentifiabilityNoise

All concepts