Difference between revisions of "IS428 AY2019-20T1 Assign Lee Cheng Leng Task 2"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Cllee.2017 (talk | contribs) |
Cllee.2017 (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 58: | Line 58: | ||
|| [[File:Task2A-1.png|600px|frameless]] | || [[File:Task2A-1.png|600px|frameless]] | ||
|- | |- | ||
− | |A-2|| Comparing the uncertainty of the readings taken by each sensor: | + | |A-2|| '''Comparing the uncertainty of the readings taken by each sensor:''' |
The static sensors can be said to have experienced less uncertainty than the mobile sensors. This can be observed from the number of high readings recorded on 6th April and 7th April, days where no significant event had occurred to increase the radiation levels in St. Himark. We would thus expect the radiation readings for these two days to be around the background radiation level, however the mobile sensor readings record many high radiation levels of up to 1700cpm in that period. | The static sensors can be said to have experienced less uncertainty than the mobile sensors. This can be observed from the number of high readings recorded on 6th April and 7th April, days where no significant event had occurred to increase the radiation levels in St. Himark. We would thus expect the radiation readings for these two days to be around the background radiation level, however the mobile sensor readings record many high radiation levels of up to 1700cpm in that period. | ||
Line 87: | Line 87: | ||
! S/N !! Findings !! Visual Proof | ! S/N !! Findings !! Visual Proof | ||
|- | |- | ||
− | | | + | |B1|| Based on the variance in radiation levels per neighbourhood over the entire simulation period found from the mobile sensor data, it was discovered that the top five neighbourhoods with the greatest variation radiation levels are as follows: |
+ | |||
+ | '''Wilson Forest, East Parton, Chapparal, Downtown, Northwest.''' | ||
+ | || [[File:Task2B-1.png|600px|frameless]] | ||
|- | |- | ||
− | | | + | |B2|| Based on the static sensor data, these regions are more prone to uncertainty. This is because there are no static sensors located in these regions. Given that static sensors have lower uncertainty in its measurements, the radiation readings taken from these regions are prone to higher uncertainty. |
− | + | ||
− | | | + | The neighbourhoods are: |
+ | '''Northwest, Weston, Southton, Easton, East Parton, West Parton, Oak Willow, Chapparal, Terrapin Springs, Pepper Mill, Wilson Forest.''' | ||
+ | || [[File:Task2B-2.png|600px|frameless]] | ||
|} | |} | ||
Revision as of 17:08, 12 October 2019
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Use visual analytics to represent and analyze uncertainty in the measurement of radiation across the city.
a. Compare uncertainty of the static sensors to the mobile sensors. What anomalies can you see? Are there sensors that are too uncertain to trust?
b. Compare uncertainty of the static sensors to the mobile sensors. What anomalies can you see? Are there sensors that are too uncertain to trust?
c. What effects do you see in the sensor readings after the earthquake and other major events? What effect do these events have on uncertainty?
S/N | Findings | Visual Proof |
---|---|---|
Example | Example | Example |
Example | Example | Example |
Example | Example | Example |