## 4 Case Study of Punjab OSM Data
### Results
#### 4.2.3 Semantic Accuracy  
The model (Figure 4) was used to assess the history file of the area under examination. The analysis concluded that a total of 611 users (Figure 7a) have contributed through the period 2007 to 2016. They have contributed 634,173 nodes, 86,176 ways and 393 relations with very the first node added in September 2007. Figure 8 presents the historical development of three components of OSM data, whereas Figure 9 depicts the changes in OSM data over the years. Further, by analyzing the user contribution count, the categories of user are classified as suggested by [PERSON] and [PERSON] [48]. Figure 7b depicts the graphical count of the class of contributor and calculated that 45.6%, 11.9% and 42.5% as junior, senior and non-recurring mappers exist for data under investigation. Figure 7f presents the number of active distinct contributor's and provides a graphical analysis about the user activity in the region. Further, Figure 7e reveals the relationship between user feature edits and their percentage contributions.  
The investigation of the number distinct contributors (Figure 7c), those who developed a feature out of a total 70,332 (line features), revealed that 8.45% of line features have been edited by more than 10 distinct users. Furthermore, the analysis of the maximum versions of features concluded that there are only 215 features, which are heavily edited, i.e., have a version more than or equal to 15, 71.13% features still exist with Version 1 status and 4.6% features have five or more than five, but less than five edits (Figure 7d).  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**Sr. No.** & **Type** & **Data Till January 2016** & **Data Till February 2017** \\ \hline
1 & living\_street & (15,410.22 m) 4.75\% & (15,921.75 m) 4.99\% \\ \hline
2 & primary & (892,920.07 m) 54.01\% & (881,872.72 m) 54.22\% \\ \hline
3 & primary\_link & (6821.38 m) 76.35\% & (6821.38 m) 92.49\% \\ \hline
4 & residential & (299,629.34 m) 5.17\% & (317,655.36 m) 3.58\% \\ \hline
5 & road & (2406.07 m) 1.09\% & - \\ \hline
6 & secondary & (619,726.5 m) 28\% & (664,109.17 m) 27.88\% \\ \hline
7 & secondary\_link & (930.66 m) 23\% & (930.66 m) 80.66\% \\ \hline
8 & service & (24,643.08 m) 7.37\% & (25,239.91 m) 4.79\% \\ \hline
9 & tertiary & (2,890,667.47 m) 33.72\% & (3,039,071.22 m) 17.07\% \\ \hline
10 & tertiary\_link & (13,970.34 m) 7.11\% & (14,594.31 m) 6.94\% \\ \hline
11 & trunk & (1,474,286.38 m) 46.08\% & (1,508,242.11 m) 46.74\% \\ \hline
12 & trunk\_link & (34,432.64 m) 58.89\% & (7624.25 m) 20.13\% \\ \hline
13 & unclassified & (237,603.93 m) 2.23\% & - \\ \hline
14 & motorway & - & (657.65 m) 100\% \\ \hline
15 & unknown & - & (3212.6 m) 3.38\% \\ \hline
16 & Total & (6,513,448.09 m) 19.60\% & (6,485,953.07 m) 18.48\% \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 2: Class-wise statistics of the attribute completeness of two datasets.  
Figure 7: Pictorial presentation of statistics obtained from the user contribution processing model. (**a**) Development of contributors; (**b**) classification of contributors; (**c**) number of contributors per feature; (**d**) maximum version per features; (**e**) contributors and their accumulated percentage of contributions; (**f**) development of active distinct contributors.  
Figure 8: Historical development of OSM Punjab (India) data.