6 posts tagged with "Coordinate-first scoring"

We had just watched our geocoder beat Nominatim across the United States by fifteen points, and we were feeling good about ourselves. So we pointed the same benchmark at Europe expecting a victory lap. Europe handed us a double-digit loss instead.

That sat badly. Not because losing is shameful — Nominatim is the bar, it carries the whole planet on community-contributed data, and clearing it anywhere is the goal. It sat badly because we didn't understand it. We knew our parser wasn't ten points worse in Europe than in America. So what was the gap actually made of?

This is the answer, the two fixes, and — because we'd be kidding you otherwise — the parts the fixes didn't reach. For the European leg we added a third system to grade against: Pelias, by way of geocode.earth, the hosted Elasticsearch stack a lot of people reach for. It turns out to be the real bar, and we'll be honest about where it still beats us.

Our parser scores 28% on Spanish addresses. By the metric that reads its labels, it is, on paper, broken in a country of forty-seven million people.

That metric is measuring the wrong thing. The moment we measured the right one, the panic fell apart.

Every geocoder turns an address into a coordinate. Almost none of them will tell you where that coordinate came from. You get a latitude, a longitude, and a vague confidence enum, and when it's wrong you have no thread to pull — no way to know whether the point came from a federal data release, a county GIS office, or a straight line drawn down the middle of a street. Mailwoman keeps the source on every point. Here's New York, every dot colored by the open dataset it came from.

Three public datasets land on your desk. The national provider registry — NPPES, every NPI in the country. A federal telecom-funding file from the FCC's Rural Health Care program, one slice of the Universal Service Fund. A state list of licensed nursing facilities from Texas HHSC. You want to know which records describe the same provider, and not one of the three shares an identifier with the other two. The NPI is internal to NPPES. The funding file keys on its own SPIN. The state list has its own facility ID. There's no crosswalk, because nobody ever built one.

So you do what everyone does: you start a spreadsheet, you sort by name, and you give up around row 400.

You have a pile of records and no key to join them on. A clinic shows up in the federal provider registry, again in a state licensing export, a third time in a funding-program spreadsheet somebody keyed by hand. None of those files share an identifier. The provider number is internal to one publisher, the facility ID to another. So the join you actually want — which of these are the same place — isn't a join at all. It's a judgment call, repeated a few million times.

The market hands you two tools for this, and each one solves a different half of the problem. Neither one finishes.

Our resolver scored 93.7% on the metric we'd been quoting for months. On the same addresses, its median answer was 326 kilometers from the truth.

Both numbers are correct. That's the awkward part.