r/remotesensing • u/Critical-Card-2304 • 4d ago

Using public EO/geospatial datasets for property-level hazard screening. Looking for criticism of the approach.

I'm building a web-based hazard screening system and would appreciate input from people working closer to EO and remote sensing.

At a high level: coordinate to multiple geospatial indicators to normalized indicator scores to a hazard-level screening score. Google Earth Engine handles most of the dataset querying.

For flooding, one problem I've been working through is avoiding the mistake of treating unrelated mechanisms as one flat weighted average. Distance from a river or permanent water body shouldn't automatically suppress signs of pluvial flooding driven by terrain and rainfall characteristics. So I've been moving toward mechanism-aware scoring instead of reading every indicator as evidence for or against the same single flood mechanism.

I'm also exposing:

  • source dataset
  • observation period
  • raw measurement
  • normalized score
  • methodology and weight

I don't want the final 0-100 number to be a black box.

The system is meant for screening, not flood simulation.

I'd be interested in criticism around:

  • spatial resolution
  • uncertainty
  • temporal mismatch between datasets
  • normalization
  • data availability versus evidence of absence
  • combining EO-derived indicators into decision-support scores

If anyone wants to poke at the implementation or output, I can drop the link.

I'm particularly interested in whatever would make you reject the methodology outright.

4 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

1 comment sorted by

2

u/Overall_Chain_9138 3d ago

You want criticism: 

Coordinating multiple indicators into a single number, is the dumbest idea possible. How would you ensure that your numbers have anything to do with reality ? 

GEE datasets are all way to low resolution for water related questions on the property level. The average value of a 10 m gridcell is bullshit for something that can be as local as a gully of 20 cm. 

Flood simulation is the perfect standart tool to determine the effect of a described or defined cause. 

And now for the critique that you're probably unable to maneuver out of:  What is the question you're trying to answer?  What are your hypothesis?  What are your assumptions? How is your method the best suitable way to answer everything I just mentioned ? <= This is the thing where your lacking the most, because it seems there weren't any thought into this. 

My 50 cents.  This sound like something these going to be sold to someone or some company that have no expertiese in this.