Applied sciences

Advances in Geodesy and Geoinformation

Content

Advances in Geodesy and Geoinformation | 2025 | vol.74 | No. 1

Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Functioning of maps in different areas of human activity provides the right context for the formation of cartographic functional styles. The community that participates in this map-related activity gains knowledge. When developing a system of cartographic functional styles, it is important to consider how users value cartographic functional styles. The purpose of the research is to evaluate cartographic functional styles based on the results of the target group survey. In order to achieve the goals of the research, the framework of the system of cartographic functional styles has been prepared, consisting of the main components that determine the cartographic functional style. Maps illustrating characteristic features of different styles are included. A questionnaire for the survey was prepared. Stylistic analysis of modern maps, analysis of information sources was carried out during the research. The maps are produced using data from different data sources and GIS software. 4 maps on the current topic of wind energy are the results of this activity. 104 respondents from different fields of activity took part in the survey. The results of the survey show that as many as 85 percents of the respondents basically agree with the statement that maps in general are characterized by a variety of cartographic functional styles. The respondents give high priority to the target audience for which the map is intended in the system of functional styles. Based on the results of the survey, the framework of the system of cartographic functional styles has been specified.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Rita Viliuviene
1
ORCID: ORCID
Linas Bevainis
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

This study aims to enhance damage detection methods for the agricultural sector in Ukraine, which has been severely affected by ongoing conflict. While existing approaches, such as the method by Kussul et al. (2023), are among the best for monitoring damage, they are limited by the use of static threshold coefficients that can lead to inaccurate results, particularly false positives. To address these issues, we introduce a new approach using Symbiotic Artificial Intelligence (SAI), which integrates human oversight with machine learning to enable real-time adjustments to detection sensitivity based on field-specific characteristics. The proposed SAI-based method was tested using high-resolution satellite imagery from MAXAR for fields in Donetsk and Kherson. Results demonstrated a significant reduction in false positive rates, from 8.5% to approximately 1%, while maintaining a high rate of correctly identified undamaged areas. However, a slight decrease in true positive detections was observed, indicating a necessary balance between false positive reduction and sensitivity to actual damage. The SAI method effectively minimized false detections at field boundaries and other non-damage-related anomalies. This approach showcases the potential of combining human expertise with AI to improve accuracy and adaptability in damage detection. While the results are promising, further research should focus on automating the adjustment of detection thresholds for broader application, such as developing regression models to optimize field-specific coefficients.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Oleksandr Parkhomchuk
1
ORCID: ORCID
Sofiia Drozd
1 2
ORCID: ORCID
Andrii Shelestov
1 2
ORCID: ORCID
Polina Mikava
2
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Space Research Institute NASU-SSAU, Kyiv, Ukraine
  2. National Technical University of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is analysing the correlation between the magnitude of the annual amplitude of seasonal changes in the coordinate components of GNSS reference stations and the height of the antenna mounting above the ground. For this purpose, the daily coordinate solutions of more than 500 GNSS reference stations that are part of the IGS (International GNSS Service) network were studied due to their distribution across the globe and long operating time, for some stations dating back to the 1990s. To minimize the impact of the tectonic plate movements authors adopted coordinates of reference stations inside each of the 21 tectonic plates. The coordinates in a topocentric reference frame were detrended in accordance with a linear model, with the objective of removing first-order trends. Subsequently, the seasonal yearly functions were calculated for each North, East and Up component. Finally, the amplitude of the seasonal factor for each station was determined. As a result of the analysis, the existence of annual amplitudes of coordinate changes was demonstrated for some of the stations, but no significant correlation between this phenomenon and the height of the GNSS antenna mounting was shown. In the case of the horizontal components, the majority of the station’s time series is characterized by the amplitude of seasonal function does not exceed 2.5–3 mm, and 5 mm for the vertical component.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Kamil Maciuk
1 2
ORCID: ORCID
Grzegorz Olejarz
1
ORCID: ORCID
Mohamed Abdelhamid
1 3
ORCID: ORCID
Agata Bem
1
ORCID: ORCID
Karol Krawczyk
4 5
ORCID: ORCID
Paweł Postek
6
ORCID: ORCID
Aleksandra Maciejewska
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. AGH University of Krakow, Krakow, Poland
  2. Lviv Polytechnic National University, Lviv, Ukraine
  3. Helwan University, Cairo, Egypt
  4. Kielce University of Technology, Kielce, Poland
  5. Central Office of Measures, Warsaw, Poland
  6. University of Life Science in Lublin, Lublin, Poland
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Recent advancements in remote sensing technology have facilitated the acquisition of images with higher spatial resolution. In response to this rapid technological evolution, the paradigm of OBIA has emerged as a key approach. An essential component of OBIA is image segmentation, where the careful selection of an appropriate segmentation algorithm and its parameters significantly influences the quality of the segmentation output. This study aims to conduct LULC analysis on Sentinel-2 imagery and compare the accuracy of the SVM classifier across different segmentation methods produced by MRS, SLIC, Mean Shift, and Quick Shift algorithms. The selected study area is located in the Marmara region of Turkey and characterized by seven major LULC classes. The segmentation was conducted though four algorithms, with 60 segment features being extracted for each output, considering spectral, textural, and geometric attributes separately. Following the classification process with SVM, overall accuracies of 96.14% for the MRS, 91.00% for the SLIC, 89.95% for the Mean Shift and 87.95% for the Quick Shift approach were estimated. These results underscore the superior performance of the MRS algorithm with significant level of improvement. This high level of accuracy holds significant potential for delivering more dependable and precise outcomes in planning and decision-making processes. Moreover, integrating XAI, specifically the LIME algorithm, enhances the transparency and comprehensibility of classification analysis within the OBIA framework. Features associated with the NIR and SWIR bands were found to have predominantly positive effects. This integration contributes to improved transparency, enabling more informed and reliable decision-making processes.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Elif Ozlem Yilmaz
1
ORCID: ORCID
Yakup Kaan Uzun
1
ORCID: ORCID
Emre Berkan
1
ORCID: ORCID
Taskin Kavzoglu
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Gebze Technical University, Kocaeli, Turkey
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Over the past decade, object-based image analysis (OBIA) has gained prominence as a widely adopted method for generating land use/land cover (LULC) maps. This study aims to evaluate the performance of various classification algorithms within the OBIA framework using SPOT-6 satellite imagery. The research methodology involved segmenting the images with the multi-resolution segmentation (MRS) algorithm, followed by the application of convolutional neural networks (CNN), random forest (RF), and support vector machine (SVM) algorithms for classification. The study was conducted in the Perpignan province, located in the Pyrénées-Orientales region of France. After the segmentation stage, CNN, RF, and SVM classifiers were employed to classify the image segments based on both spectral and spatial attributes. The accuracy of the resulting thematic maps was assessed using standard metrics, including overall accuracy (OA), the Kappa coefficient (KC), and the F��score (FS). Of the three classifiers, CNN achieved the highest overall accuracy at 91.28%, outperforming SVM, which attained an OA of 90.50%, and RF, which recorded an OA of 87.28%. Additionally, this study explored the integration of explainable artificial intelligence (AI) techniques, specifically the Shapley Additive Explanations (SHAP) algorithm, to enhance the interpretability of the machine learning models. This approach fosters greater trust, accountability, and acceptance in decision-making processes. By leveraging SHAP values, the study provides deeper insights into the decision-making processes of the CNN, SVM, and RF classifiers, ultimately enhancing the transparency and comprehensibility of these models.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Taskin Kavzoglu
1
ORCID: ORCID
Yakup Kaan Uzun
1
ORCID: ORCID
Emre Berkan
1
ORCID: ORCID
Elif Ozlem Yilmaz
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Gebze Technical University, Kocaeli, Turkey
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The relevance of this work lies in the need to improve height monitoring methods for neotectonics processes in areas with irregular topographic environments and to develop technological requirements to ensure the necessary accuracy and reliability of the results. The purpose of this study is to control subsidence in mining fields within technogenically stressed areas influenced by the Kalush–Holyn potash deposit and to develop a comprehensive methodology for monitoring the network of observation stations. The study includes highprecision measurements of ellipsoidal heights using the Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS), determination of orthometric height differences based on high-precision geometric leveling, and application of orthometric corrections. At the junction points of the leveling networks, known data on the geological structure of underground layers, the distribution of earth masses, and the measured value of gravity have enabled the determination of orthometric corrections. The methodology employed in the study accounts for changes in the shape of the level surface on technogenic polygons and the heterogeneity of the gravity field. Adherence to the developed technological requirements allows for additional control of monitoring results and ensures an accuracy in height difference determination of no less than 1/1000000. The results of the study demonstrate that independent measurements of orthometric and ellipsoidal height differences facilitate a more precise investigation of geodynamic processes in technogenically stressed areas by calculating vertical line deviations. Thus, the proposed approach to monitoring neotectonics processes can be used to develop effective strategies for monitoring and managing environmental risks associated with geological hazards.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Taras Hutsul
1
ORCID: ORCID
Bogdan Lysko
2
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Yuriy Fedkovych Chernivtsi National University, Chernivtsi, Ukraine
  2. Ivano–Frankivsk National Technical University of Oil and Gas, Ivano–Frankivsk, Ukraine
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) and GRACE Follow-On satellite missions have been monitoring hydrological events on Earth’s surface for nearly two decades. Monthly gravity solutions from these satellites are available as Level-2 (L2) spherical harmonic coefficients or as ready-to-use Level-3 (L3) data, typically representing Total Water Storage (TWS) variations. L3 data, such as Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) mascon data, include essential corrections like post-glacial rebound and signal-leakage, and precisely represent TWS variations for specific regions, such as river basins, without additional corrections. However, certain geopotential changes, such as groundwater-induced vertical displacements, gravity anomalies and geoid height changes cannot be directly obtained from these data. To evaluate these geopotential changes, L3 data needs to be transformed into harmonic coefficient solutions. While this method is more computationally demanding compared to adapting L2 data with necessary corrections, the question remains: How can L3 TWS data be directly transformed into other potential changes? In this study, we propose a regression approach for the Türkiye region, using approximately hundred GSFC-mascon blocks to convert TWS into groundwater-induced vertical displacements. Transformation parameters are estimated by considering outcomes from L2 data, specifically selecting DDK2- filtered data. The ratio between vertical displacement and TWS for each mascon is modeled by a quadratic function based on TWS magnitudes. Investigating residuals reveals a timedependent pattern, which requires a second regression to model this aspect. This two-step regression approach successfully transforms TWS into vertical displacements, with a rootmean- square error of about half a millimeter, providing satisfactory results for the region.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Cüneyt Aydın
1
ORCID: ORCID
Özge Günes
1
ORCID: ORCID
Beyza Güney
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Yildiz Technical University, Esenler, Türkiye
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The evaluation of the accuracy of generated DEMs using three remote sensing techniques on three types of forest road surfaces was performed. As a sample data, we used the forest road constructed from asphalt, concrete road slabs, and paving stones located in Víglaš, Central Slovakia.We evaluated the vertical accuracy of the DEMs produced by mobile laser scanning (MLS, Leica Pegasus, 840 pts/m2, airborne laser scanning (ALS, Leica ALS 70, 9 pts/m2, and aerial photogrammetry (AP, Leica RCD 30, 5 pts/m2. DEMs were generated in ArcGIS with a final resolution of 0.5m using the IDW method. The accuracy of DEMs was evaluated with the reference dataset on 700 check points. Regarding road surface capture quality, terrain generation, and point density, the MLS method dominates. It provides the RMSE values in range of ± 0.01 m to ± 0.03 m. The ALS method provided balanced RMSE results irrespective of surface type (RMSE ± 0.04 m to ± 0.05 m). The AP has the highest variability on all surface types (RMSE ± 0.12 m to ± 0.22 m). For AP, 0the decimeter-level accuracy is not sufficient for construction and maintenance purposes. This method provided the largest blunders at the road parts closest to the trees. ALS, with its ability to partially penetrate the forest canopy, can provide complex information about forest roads for inventory purposes. MLS provided the best spatial accuracy, enabling both construction and maintenance works. In any case, the advantage is that these data types can be combined.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Miroslav Kardoš
1
ORCID: ORCID
Łukasz Borowski
2
ORCID: ORCID
Ivan Sackov
3
ORCID: ORCID
Julián Tomaštík
1
ORCID: ORCID
Daniel Curila
1
ORCID: ORCID
Kamil Maciuk
4
ORCID: ORCID
Michal Ferencík
1
ORCID: ORCID
Izabela Basista
4
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Technical University Zvolen, Zvolen, Slovakia
  2. University of the National Education Commission, Krakow, Poland
  3. National Forest Centre, Zvolen, Slovakia
  4. AGH University of Krakow, Krakow, Poland
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The relative share of debris-covered glaciers strongly increased in recent decades due to climate change and amplified rock production, but despite their relevance as climate indicators, accurate demarcation of respective glaciers is challenging. Remote sensing is an important tool for glacier mapping, but most existing studies apply medium resolution sensors, which are not suitable for small, rock covered glaciers, or use semi-automatic approaches. We present a simple methodology to automatically derive debris-covered glacier areas by using multitemporal, high resolution UAV images. Thereby, standard products, such as elevation differences calculated from digital surface models and displacement rasters, combined with statistical or error thresholds, provide the basis to automatically delineate glacier areas. The comparison of the automatically derived debris-covered glacier area to the geodetically determined glacier snout showed lowest errors for the elevation-based method using yearly data (total error of 0.32 m or 8.6% of the yearly glacier retreat) and higher errors for four-year intervals (0.97 m, 34% of the yearly glacier retreat) or displacement-based methods (0.51 m, 13.6% of the yearly glacier retreat with yearly epochs). Visual evaluation also showed strong errors of the displacement-based method with many areas wrongly identified as debris-covered glacier area.We conclude that the elevation-based method allows for accurate delineation of debris-covered glaciers and pro-glacial areas, providing increased standardization of glacier monitoring using remote sensing.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Harald Zandler
1
ORCID: ORCID
Wolfgang Sulzer
1
ORCID: ORCID
Viktor Kaufmann
2
ORCID: ORCID

  1. University of Graz, Graz, Austria
  2. Graz University of Technology, Graz, Austria

Instructions for authors

The Advances in Geodesy and Geoinformation accepts a wide range of papers including original research papers, original short communication papers, review articles and symposium pieces. Details of submission are provided below. Please, note, that at the submission stage, the author(s) ensure(s) that the submitted work will not be published elsewhere in any language without the consent of the copyright owners. All co-authors also agree on the publication ethics statement.

For all parties involved in the act of publishing (the author, the journal editor(s), the peer reviewer and the publisher) it is necessary to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior. The ethics statements for Advances in Geodesy and Geoinformation are based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors (https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines ).


TYPES OF MANUSCRIPTS

Original Research papers:

Research papers can have 8000 words in length, although longer articles will be accepted on an occasional basis if the topic demands this length of treatment.

Original Short communication papers:

Short communication papers can have 2500 words as a maximum and contain at most 1 table and 3 figures. Such a note is technical and well-focused, for example illustrating a new technique, describing a well worked-out case study or a specific new algorithm.

Original research and short communications papers should contain the following sections: Abstract (max. of 250 words), Introduction, Data used and methods applied, Results, Discussion, Conclusions, Acknowledgments, References.

Review article:

The journal also considers short reviews (not exceeding 12 pages in print) intended to debate recent advances in rapidly developing fields that are within its scope. Such articles may have ample references. Reviews should contain the following sections: Abstract (max. of 250 words), Introduction, Topics (with headings and subheadings), Conclusions and Outlook, Acknowledgments, References

Symposium pieces:

Symposium pieces describe a research symposium or seminar and present the topic covered in the form of a news brief, opinion piece, or mini-review. A news brief summarizes a few talks on the same general topic or issues at a given symposium. This can include a summary of the discussion that followed the symposium or the significance of the talks at a large symposia to a particular field. It is important to indicate the main point of the symposium.

An opinion piece discusses the personal perspectives after a given symposium, including an analysis of the symposium and how this affected the author.

A mini-review can be based on a theme from a given symposium. This may require the author(s) to review articles written by a speaker at that symposium.

These articles should be no more than 3,000 words. All symposium pieces should include the following sections: Abstract (max. of 250 words), Introduction, Topics (with headings and subheadings) [specifically required for a mini-review], Conclusions and Outlook, References


LEGAL REQUIREMENTS

The author(s) guarantee(s) that the manuscript will not be published elsewhere in any language without the consent of the copyright owners, that the rights of the third parties will not be violated, and that the publisher will not held legally responsible should there be any claims for compensation.

Authors wishing to include figures or text passages that have already been published elsewhere are required to obtain permission from the copyright owner(s) and to include evidence that such permission has been granted when submitting their papers. Any material received without such evidence will be assumed to originate from the authors.


ETHICAL RESPONSIBILITIES OF AUTHORS

Submission of the manuscript implies: that the work has not been published before (except in form of an abstract or as a part of a published lecture, review or thesis); that it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere; that its publication has been approved by all co-authors, if any, as well as by the responsible authorities at the institution where the work was carried out.

In case the manuscript has more than one author its submission should include the list specifying contribution of each author to the manuscript with indicating who is the author of the concept, assumptions, research methodology, data processing. Major responsibility is on the corresponding author.

The Editor will counteract in Advances in Geodesy and Geoinformation against Ghostwriting, i.e. when someone substantially contributed to the preparation of the manuscript but has neither been included to the list of authors nor his role is mentioned in the acknowledgements as well as Ghost authorship, i.e. when the author/co-author did not contribute to the manuscript or his contribution is negligible. Any detected case of Ghostwriting and Ghost authorship will be exposed and the appropriate subjects, i.e. employers, scientific organizations, associations of editors etc., will be informed.


MANUSCRIPT SUBMISSION

The manuscripts are submitted online via https://www.editorialsystem.com/agg/ and should be submitted in Word. Please, do not exceed the number of words intended to a specific submission. Please, count the number of words before submitting, with abstract, acknowledgements and references excluded.

Names of authors and their affiliation should be removed from the manuscripts for the review process in order to have a fair evaluation of their manuscript. All authors of the manuscript are responsible for its content; they must have agreed to its publication and have given the corresponding author the authority to act on their behalf in all matters pertaining to publication. The Corresponding Author is responsible for informing the coauthors of the manuscript status throughout the submission, review, and production process. The editorial system requires: the name(s) of the author(s), the name(s) and address(es) of the affiliation(s) of the author(s), the e-mail address of the corresponding author, the 16-digit ORCID number of the author(s). The corresponding author is required to provide his/her ORCID number. ORCID numbers of co-authors are not necessary, but advised.

Manuscript preparation

Manuscripts should be typed in single-line spacing throughout on the A4 sheet with 2.5 cm margins. Use plain 11-point Times Roman font for text, italics for textual emphasis, bold for mathematical vectors.

1. Abstract: The paper must be preceded by a sufficiently informative abstract presenting the most important results and conclusions. It should not be longer than 250 words and should not contain any unexplained abbreviations and unspecified references.

2. Keywords: Three to five keywords should be supplied. These are used for indexing purposes.

3. Introduction: It should explicitly state the purpose of the investigation and give a short review of the pertinent literature.

4. Main text: It should include all methods and input data (working details must be given concisely; well-known operations should not be described in details); results presented in tabular or graph form, with appropriate statistical evaluation, discussion of results - statement of conclusions drawn from the work and conclusions.

5. Acknowledgements: Please, include all institutions, names or numbers of grants that require acknowledgement. The names of funding organizations or institutions providing data should be given in full. This information is mandatory for all submitted papers.

6. Author Contributions: All authors contributing to the paper need to have their role assigned.

7. Data availability: Indicate where to download the data you used and how they can be accessed. Are your final results available anywhere?

8. References: The list of references should be prepared in alphabetical order and should only include works that are cited in the text and that have been published or accepted for publication. Personal communications could only be mentioned in the text. References in the text, should be cited by author(s) last name and year: e.g. (Beutler, 2003a), (Featherstone and Kirby, 2000), (Schwarz et al., 1990), (Sjöberg et al., 2000; Strykowski, 2001b; 2002). The details on the reference list preparation is provided below.

9. Formulae and symbols: They must be written legibly and will be typeset in italics. One-layer indexing is preferable. Numbering of formulae, if necessary should be given in brackets fitted to the right margin. use the equation editor or MathType for equations

10. Illustrations and tables: All figures (photographs, graphs or diagrams) and tables should be cited in the text and numbered consecutively throughout. Lowercase roman letters should identify figure parts. Figure legends must be brief and must contain self-sufficient explanations of the illustrations. Each table should have a title and a legend explaining any abbreviation used in that table. Tables and illustrations have to be placed in the text and send as separate files.

11. Units: SI units must be used.

12. Short title: Please, include a running head consisting of at most 60 characters. This concise banner represents the title of the article and must be submitted by the author(s).

Proofreading

Proofreading is the responsibility of the author. Corrections should be clear; standard correction marks should be used. Corrections that lead to a change in the page layout should be avoided. The author is entitled to formal corrections only. Substantial changes in content, e.g. new results, corrected values, title and authorship are not allowed without the approval of the editor. In such case please contact the Editor-in-chief before returning the proofs.

Reference list

a. Journal Article (one author)

Nikora, V. (2006). Hydrodynamics of aquatic ecosystems: spatial-averaging perspective. Acta Geophysica, 55(1), 3-10. DOI: 10.2478/s11600-006-0043-6.

b. Journal Article (two or more authors)

Cudak, M. and Karcz J. (2006). Momentum transfer in an agitated vessel with off-centred impellers. Chem. Pap. 60(5), 375-380. DOI: 10.2478/s11696-006-0068-y.

c. Journal article from an online database

Czajgucki Z., Zimecki M. & Andruszkiewicz R. (2006, December). The immunoregulatory effects of edeine analogues in mice [Abstract]. Cell. Mol. Biol. Lett. 12(3), 149-161. Retrieved December 6.

d. Book (one author)

Baxter, R. (1982). Exactly Solvable Models in Statistical Mechanics. New York: Academic Press.

e. Book (two or more authors)

Kleiner, F.S., Mamiya C.J. and Tansey R.G. (2001). Gardner’s art through the ages (11th ed.). Fort Worth, USA: Harcourt College Publishers.

f. Book chapter or article in an edited book

Roll, W.P. (1976). ESP and memory. In J.M.O. Wheatley and H.L. Edge (Eds.), . (pp. 154-184). Springfield, IL: American Psychiatric Press.

g. Proceedings from a conference

Field, G. (2001). Rethinking reference rethought. In Revelling in Reference: Reference and Information Services Section Symposium, 12-14 October 2001 (pp. 59-64). Melbourne, Victoria, Australia: Australian Library and Information Association.

h. Online document

Johnson, A. (2000). Abstract Computing Machines. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. Retrieved March 30, 2006, from SpringerLink http://springerlink.com/content/w25154. DOI: 10.1007/b138965.

i. Report

Osgood, D. W., and Wilson, J. K. (1990). Covariation of adolescent health problems. Lincoln: University of Nebraska. (NTIS No. PB 91-154 377/AS).

j. Government publication

Ministerial Council on Drug Strategy. (1997). The national drug strategy: Mapping the future. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.

Charges

Advances in Geodesy and Geoinformation is published in Open Access journal with all content available with no charge in full text version. This means that all articles are available on the internet to all users immediately upon publication free of charge for the readers.



Submit your article

Publication Ethics Policy


ETHIC POLICY

Editor Responsibilities

The editor of Advances in Geodesy and Geoinformation is guided by COPE’s Guidelines ( https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines) for Retracting Articles when considering retracting, issuing expressions of concern about, and issuing corrections pertaining to articles that have been published in the journal. The editor evaluates manuscripts for intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the author(s). The editor do not disclose any information about a manuscript under consideration to anyone other than the author(s), reviewers and potential reviewers, and in some instances the editorial board members, as appropriate. The editor seeks so ensure a fair and appropriate peer review process. Editors recuse themselves (i.e. ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers. Editors require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate action should be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern.

Reviewer Responsibilities


Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and, through the editorial communication with the author, may also assist the author in improving the manuscript. Any invited referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its timely review will be impossible should immediately notify the editor so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.

Any manuscripts received for review is treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except if authorized by the editor. Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inacceptable. Referees should express their views clearly with appropriate supporting arguments.

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published data of which they have personal knowledge.

Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review is kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider evaluating manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the submission.

Author Responsibilities

Authors reporting results of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the manuscript. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Parallel submission of the same manuscript to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should also cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be named in an Acknowledgement section.

The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors (according to the above definition) and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the author list of the manuscript, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the authors must clearly identify these in the manuscript.

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or their interpretation in the manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal’s editor or publisher and cooperate with them to either retract the paper or to publish an appropriate erratum.

Publisher’s Confirmation

In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication or plagiarism the publisher, in close collaboration with the editors, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication

Peer-review Procedure

MANUSCRIPT REVIEW PROCEDURE

The editor of a peer-reviewed journal is responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the journal should be published, and, moreover, is accountable for everything published in the journal. In making these decisions, the editor may be guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board as well as by legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers when making publication decisions. The editor maintain the integrity of the academic record, preclude business needs from compromising intellectual and ethical standards, and always be willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when needed. The editor evaluate manuscripts for intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the author(s). The editor do not disclose any information about a manuscript under consideration to anyone other than the author(s), reviewers and potential reviewers, and in some instances the editorial board members, as appropriate.

The editor is guided by COPE’s Guidelines ( https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines) for Retracting Articles when considering retracting, issuing expressions of concern about, and issuing corrections pertaining to articles that have been published in Advances in Geodesy and Geoinformation.

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and, through the editorial communication with the author, may also assist the author in improving the manuscript.

Any manuscripts received for review is treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except if authorized by the editor.

Manuscript evaluations are assigned one of four outcomes: Accept without changes, accept after changes suggested by reviewer, rate manuscript once again after major changes and another review, reject, withdraw.

Manuscripts requiring minor revision (accept after changes suggested by reviewer) not require a second review. All manuscripts receiving a "Rate manuscript once again after major changes and another review " evaluation must be subjected to a second review. Rejected manuscripts are given no further consideration. Normally, manuscripts that receive a "Rate manuscript once again after major changes and another review " decision have only one additional chance for revision and the revised version should be uploaded to the Editorial System within six weeks. If the author(s) failed to make satisfactory changes, the manuscript is rejected. On acceptance, manuscripts are subject to editorial amendment to suit house style. The article should be withdraw due to technical reason (e.g. names of authors are placed in the text, lack of references, or inappropriate structure of the text) or plagiarism.

Reviewers

Reviewers list 2022

Prof. Cüneyt Aydın, Yildiz Technical University, Turkey
Dr. Agnieszka Bieda, AGH University of Science and Technology, Poland
Prof. Elzbieta Bielecka, Military University of Technology, Poland
Dr. Monika Biryło, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, Poland
Dr. Andrzej Bobojć, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, Poland
Dr. Piotr Bożek, University of Agriculture in Krakow, Poland
Dr. Jerzy Chmiel, Warsaw University of Technology, Poland
Prof. Kazimierz Ćmielewski, Wrocław University of Environmental and Life Sciences, Poland
Dr. Bahattin Erdogan, Yildiz Technical University, Turkey
Prof. Juraj Gasinec, Technical University of Kosice, Slovakia
Dr. Volodymyr Hlotov, Lviv Polytechnic National University, Ukraine
Dr. Tymoteusz Horbiński, Institute of Physical Geography and Environmental Planning, Poland
Dr. Oleksandra Hulko, Lviv Polytechnic National University, Ukraine
Dr. Joanna Janicka, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, Poland
Dr. Izabela Jaśkiewicz-Proć, KGHM CUPRUM sp. z o.o. – CBR, Poland
Prof. Roman Józef Kadaj, Rzeszów University of Technology, Poland
Dr. Jānis Kaminskis, Riga Technical University, Latvia
Dr. Yulia Кhavar, Lviv Polytechnic National University, Ukraine
Dr. Jolanta Korycka-Skorupa, Warsaw University, Poland
Prof. Wolfgang Kresse, University of Applied Sciences Neubrandenburg, Germany
Prof. Eugene Levin, Michigan Technological University, United States
Dr. Tomasz Lipecki, AGH University of Science and Technology, Poland
Dr. Tomasz Liwosz, Warsaw University of Technology, Poland
Prof. Radovan Machotka, Brno University of Technology, Czech Republic
Prof. Šárka Mayerová, Faculty of Military Technology University of Defence, Brno, Czech Republic
Dr. Bartosz Mitka, University of Agriculture in Krakow, Poland
Prof. Marek Mróz, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, Poland
Prof. Maria Mrówczyńska, Architecture and Environmental Engineering University of Zielona Gora, Poland
Dr. Tomasz Noszczyk, University of Agriculture in Krakow, Poland
Dr. Agata Orych, Military University of Technology, Poland
Dr. Joanna Pluto-Kossakowska, Warsaw University of Technology, Poland
Prof. Krystian Pyka, AGH University of Science and Technology, Poland
Dr. Umberto Robustelli, University of Naples "Parthenope", Italy
Prof. Zofia Rzepecka, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, Poland
Dr. Vira Sai, Lviv Polytechnic National University, Ukraine
Dr. D. Ugur Sanli, Yildiz Technical University, Turkey
Dr. Mahmut Oğuz Selbesoğlu, Istanbul Technical University, Turkey
Prof. Izabela Skrzypczak, Rzeszów University of Technology, Poland
Prof. Viktor Sidorenko, Kryvyi Rih National University, Geodesy Department, Ukraine
Dr. Katarzyna Stępniak, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, Poland
Dr. Lech Stolecki, KGHM CUPRUM Sp. z.o.o. – Research and Development Centre, Poland
Dr. Jacek Sztubecki, Bydgoszcz University of Technology, Poland
Dr. İbrahim Tiryakioğlu, Afyon Kocatepe University, Turkey
Prof. Ihor Trevoho, Lviv Polytechnic National University, Ukraine
Dr. Agnieszka Trystula, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, Poland
Dr. Tomasz Wojciechowski, MIlitary Univesrity of Technology, Poland
Dr. Ireneusz Wyczałek, Poznań University of Technology, Poland
Dr. Patrycja Wyszkowska, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, Poland
Dr. Hanfa Xing, Shandong Normal University, China
Prof. Cemal Özer YİĞİT, Gebze Technical University, Turkey
Dr. Marek Hubert Zienkiewicz, Gdańsk University of Technology, Poland
Prof. Ryszard Źróbek, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, Poland

Plagiarism Policy

Advances in Geodesy and Geoinformation journal uses iThenticate software to screen for plagiarism. Each manuscript submitted to the journal undergoes this procedure before it is send to the Reviewers. Authors submitting an original article should be certain that no paragraphs or data of others are presented as their own. If this is the case it will be considered 'plagiarism'. If material from other works is used, appropriate acknowledgements should be made to them. This applies to all material that is copied, summarized or paraphrased from any copyrighted material. Authors should also be certain that the work they submit is original and not a duplication of their previous work. If this is the case, it may be considered 'self-plagiarism'.

This page uses 'cookies'. Learn more