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

Margin — where it appears

How much worse the second-best candidate is than the best. It is the quantity that separates a real identification from a forced one, and a systematic error common to every candidate destroys it while leaving the winner's residual small.

Named by 7 essays across 2 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

The same ranking, with the right answer removed from the library. A map drawn in Mercator, fitted by every candidate except Mercator. Something still wins: Conformal conic, by a factor of 1.64 over the runner-up, leaving 0.4 per cent of the map's width unexplained. With Mercator in the library the winner's margin is 1.2e+13. The ranking always produces a name; what tells the two situations apart is how far ahead the name is.

When the answer is not in the library

Fitting twenty candidates to a map and ranking the residuals always produces a winner, which makes it a ceremony unless it can also produce a refusal. Held out of its own library, a Mercator map is named as a conformal conic, leaving 0.4 per cent of the map's width unexplained — and the quantity that tells the two situations apart is not the residual but the margin, which is 1.6 when the truth is absent and 10¹³ when it is present.

wrong · Identify What a sheet does to the points before anybody measures them. The graticule crossings of a map drawn on Conformal conic, with an arrow at each one showing where the same crossing has moved to after the sheet dried — 0.1 per cent along the grain and 0.4 across it, with the grain at 23° to the map's axis, and the displacement magnified 60 times so it can be seen at all. The pattern is a stretch along one direction and a squeeze along the perpendicular, which is what an anisotropic scaling looks like. It is a property of the paper and has nothing to do with the map printed on it. A similarity fit to these points leaves 3.66e-4 of the map's own width unexplained, against 1.22e-10 on the unshrunk sheet.

The sheet moved before it was measured

Every method of reading a projection off a map takes its control points from the sheet and assumes the sheet is the one the cartographer drew. Paper shrinks across its grain three times as fast as along it, and on a map whose grain runs along its own axis that shrinkage is EXACTLY a change of standard parallel — one per cent moves the recovered parallel by 0.57 degrees with the residual sitting at the solver's floor.

wrong · Identify The whole of what an unlabelled map gives you. The outline of Japan as drawn on Conformal conic, delivered as an ordered list of page positions with nothing attached to any of them. No latitude, no longitude, no scale, no north. The question is whether a projection can be recovered from that, and it can: the correspondence between the ink and the ground is found by sweeping the starting point round the curve and both directions, and the true candidate comes back with a residual of 2.88e-14 against the runner-up's 4.57e-4.

A map with no graticule

Identifying a projection starts from control points, and a great many maps have none. Handed an outline with no labels on it at all, the method still works — and works better: the correspondence between ink and ground is recoverable exactly, because a similarity preserves ratios of arc length, and the margin on clean observations is 1.6 × 10¹⁰ against a graticule's 9.9 × 10⁶. What breaks it is noise, at three parts in a thousand.

wrong · Identify The floor against where the streak is, and the stretch of it a crossing sweeps. The diversion floor for the New York–London chain with a streak 200 km/h faster than a 100 km/h jet core, against where along the jet the streak's centre lies, computed exactly on a grid of positions 125 km apart and read between them. With the streak far off the floor is the plain jet's, 624.7 km. With it over the Goose Bay half it rises by up to 41.1; over the Narsarsuaq half it falls by up to 44.8. The bar is the stretch a streak starting at -1400 km sweeps in a four-hour crossing at 250 km/h; the floor to be met is the worst on it, 666.0 km. The shaded band either side is a forecast position error of ±200 km at one standard deviation.

A forecast's error in where the streak is becomes a margin

A jet streak drifting along a gap moves the diversion floor by up to forty kilometres during a crossing, and an operator knows where the streak is only from a forecast. Planned to the worst over the forecast's own crossing window, the floor needs a margin of about eight kilometres for every hundred of error in the streak's position, and stops paying for itself against simply ignoring the streak near an error of two hundred and fifty. Planned to the departure analysis alone, it is worse than ignoring the streak at any error at all.

paths · Paths Nineteen forecasts of one crossing, and the floor each says must be met. One crossing, with the forecast's error in where the streak starts at 150 km and in its drift speed at 50 km/h. The line is the worst floor over a four-hour crossing against where the streak starts, at the assumed drift of 250 km/h. Dots: nineteen ensemble members, each drawn with its own start and drift speed and placed at the worst floor its own crossing window meets. Open circle: the truth, 660.3 km. Square: the ensemble's centre, 640.3 km. Dashed: the centre's floor plus the fixed margin that covers 95 per cent of crossings at these errors, 653.3 km. Solid: the highest member, 663.2 km — the plan the ensemble gives with no margin added.

An ensemble carries its own margin, if its spread is honest

A fixed margin of about eight kilometres for every hundred of forecast error covers the diversion floor in nineteen crossings of twenty, but it needs the error's size and it is spent on every crossing alike. Nineteen forecasts of the same crossing need neither. If the truth is one more draw from the spread they come from, the highest of them covers the floor met in nineteen crossings in twenty by rank alone — whatever the error, the streak or the drift — and it holds a fifth to two fifths less in hand than the fixed margin, because it spends nothing on the crossings the streak cannot reach. What it cannot do is notice that its own spread is too small: at half the true spread it covers 88 in a hundred.

paths · Paths A season of crossings pins the stretch to a tenth only if it learns from where the streak was. The share of 400 seasons at each length whose learned stretch lies within a tenth of 1.25. From the floors' rank histogram: 25 crossings 19 per cent, 50 crossings 27 per cent, 100 crossings 32 per cent, 200 crossings 43 per cent, 400 crossings 55 per cent, 800 crossings 67 per cent. From where the streak turned out to be: 25 crossings 56, 50 crossings 72, 100 crossings 85, 200 crossings 98, 400 crossings 99, 800 crossings 100. At a hundred crossings, 85 against 32 per cent.

A season learns the stretch from where the streak was, not from the floors

An ensemble whose members spread four fifths as widely as the forecast's real error covers the diversion floor in 94 crossings of a hundred instead of 95, and the repair is to stretch every member away from the centre by a factor learned from past crossings. Learned the way the rank histogram teaches it — from where the truth's floor fell among the members' floors — a season of a hundred crossings lands within a tenth of the right stretch one time in three, and a season of eight hundred two times in three. Learned from where the streak turned out to be, which the analysis after each crossing supplies whether the streak reached the gap or not, a hundred crossings land within a tenth 85 times in a hundred and two hundred almost always. The floor is the quantity the plan is about; it is the wrong quantity to learn the spread from.

paths · Paths After a revision narrows the ensemble, a learner that never forgets is still well short of the new stretch three hundred crossings later. The stretch each learner holds before each crossing, the median over 400 winters, from 100 crossings before a forecast revision to 300 after it. Before it the members spread 0.8 of the truth's spread and the right stretch is 1.25; after it they spread 0.6 and the right stretch is 1.667 (dashed). never forgets: 1.28 at 25 crossings, 1.34 at 100, 1.44 at 300; memory 200: 1.31 at 25 crossings, 1.44 at 100, 1.59 at 300; memory 50: 1.42 at 25 crossings, 1.62 at 100, 1.68 at 300; restarts on the date: 1.63 at 25 crossings, 1.67 at 100, 1.67 at 300. Shaded: the middle eight winters in ten for the learner with a memory of 50 crossings, 1.55–1.78 at the end.

A revised forecast is relearned in as many crossings as the learner remembers

An ensemble's stretch is a property of the forecast system, and forecast systems are revised. When a revision narrows the members from four fifths of the real spread to three fifths, a learner that weights every crossing since the start of the winter equally still holds 1.44 for a new stretch of 1.67 three hundred crossings later, and leaves the plan under the floor in 93.8 crossings of a hundred instead of 95. A learner that forgets regains ninety-five per cent coverage after about as many crossings as its memory — 31, 57, 113 and 206 for memories of 25, 50, 100 and 200 — and pays for forgetting only when nothing has changed. A memory of fifty costs nothing measurable over a winter. And a bias the whole ensemble shares, which the stretch alone reads as extra spread, is found to a kilometre by a learner that tracks the mean departure as well.

paths · Paths

Named alongside it

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

VerificationEstimatorToleranceFlow fieldCoverageResidualAffineAveragingBiasBottleneckControl pointsConvention

All concepts