Advance Geographical

Information Systems
(RG721)

18.10.17
• Department of RS and GIS
• Institute of Space Technology, Karachi
 Overlay Analysis

• Overlay analysis is one of the spatial GIS

operations.
• Overlay analysis integrates spatial data with
attribute data. (Attributes are information about
each map feature.)
• Overlay analysis does this by combining
information from one GIS layer with another GIS
layer to derive or infer an attribute for one of the
layers.
 Overlay Analysis
• Overlay analysis can be a visual operation
• But analytical operations require one or more
data layers to be joined physically.
• This overlay, or spatial join, can integrate data of
different types, such as soils, vegetation, land
ownership, jurisdictions, etc.
• Rely on the spatial accuracy of the GIS layers.
• Overlay is done using Arithmetic, Boolean, and
Relational operators, and is performed in both
vector and raster domain.
Overlay Analysis
Overlay Analysis (Raster)
 Overlay Analysis (Raster)
• Not all combinations are necessary
• Necessary to note because it may change
the number of bytes to store/ represent the
output raster data.
• Compatibility issues need to be resolved.
Coordinate systems.
Cell size differences (resolved through
resampling.
Overlay Analysis (Raster)
Raster Resampling
Raster Resampling
Overlay Analysis (Vector)
 Overlay Analysis (Vector)
Points to be noted….
• Any type of feature may be overlaid with any
type of feature….BUT…
• Their overlay operations may or may not provide
useful results.
• Overlays involving polygons are most common.
• Typically, the output in a multidimensional
overlay operation is the lower dimension of the
two (or more)
Overlay Analysis (Vector)
Overlay Analysis (Vector)
Overlay operations ( the normal
stuff)
 MCDA
• Multiple-criteria decision making or
multiple-criteria decision analysis
(MCDA) is a sub-discipline of 
operations research that explicitly
considers multiple criteria in decision-
making environments. Whether in our daily
lives or in professional settings, there are
typically multiple conflicting criteria that
need to be evaluated in making decisions.
Scale for Pair‐wise Comparison
Example: Site Suitability
Analysis
• Parameters:
1. Price
2. Slope
3. View
• Price is moderately to strongly
preferred over slope
• Price is very strongly preferred
over view
• Slope is strongly preferred
Step1: Development of Pairwise Comparison Matrix
 Step2: Computation of the Criterion Weights

• This step involves following operations:

1. Sum the values in each column of the pair-
wise comparison matrix.
2. Divide each element in the matrix by its
column total
3. Compute the average of elements in each row
of the normalized matrix.
Step2: Computation of the Criterion
Weights
 Step3: Estimation of the Consistency Ratio

• This step involves following operations:

– Determine the weighted sum vector by
multiplying the criterion weights with the
values of the original pairwise comparison
matrix and finally sum these values over rows.

– Determine the consistency vector by dividing

the weighted sum vector by the criterion
weights.
Step3: Estimation of the Consistency
Ratio
 Step3: Estimation of the Consistency
ratio
• Computation of Lambda λ :

λ = (3.250+3.119+3.014) / 3 = 3.128

• λ should always be greater than or equal to

the number of criterion to be considered.
• λ = n (if the pair wise comparison matrix is
a consistent matrix)
 Step3: Estimation of the Consistency
ratio
• Computation of CI (Consistency Index) :
– CI= (λ‐n) / (n-1) = (3.128‐3) / (3-1) = 0.064

• Computation of CR (Consistency Ratio) :

– CR= CI / RI = 0.064 / 0.58 = 0.110
– Where RI is the random index provided by Saaty
and it depends on the number of criterion (n).
Random Inconsistency Index RI

• If CR<0.10 the ratio indicates a reasonable level of

consistency.
• If CR>0.10 the ratio indicates an inconsistent judgment and
the relative criterion pair wise comparison matrix needs
reconsideration and the whole process must be repeated.