Authors : K. M. D. Hasara

Volume/Issue : Volume 11 - 2026, Issue 2 - February

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/mnpt3psz

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/yszfjn96

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/26feb560

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Abstract : Marine Spatial Data Infrastructure (MSDI) simplifies the discovery, access, management and reuse of marine geospatial data with bathymetric data being one of the most basic components. But bathymetric data obtained over a long time period through a variety of technologies are highly heterogeneous in accuracy, uncertainty, completeness of documentation, and data formats, which pose serious obstacles to the systematic incorporation of MSDI. The proposed research is a Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) framework, which combines two complementary classification criteria, including technology-based accuracy levels based on sensor specifications, positioning systems, and the survey era with IHO S-67 Category Zone of Confidence (CATZOC) levels. The framework yields a two-dimensional decision matrix that gives nine secondary levels of accuracy and three levels of primary level of accuracy consolidated. The methodology is presented with the application of the case study on 9 bathymetric datasets (1991 - 2023) provided by the Hydrographic Office (NHO), National Aquatic Resources Research and Development Agency (NARA), Sri Lanka. A 2023 bathymetric survey of the Negombo Harbor with Kongsberg EA440 single-beam echo sounder and Stonex RTK positioning system was assessed in detail, which was classified as Technology Tier 4 and CATZOC Level B, and Level 5 - Standard Plus was classified as secondary and Level 2 - Moderate as primary. Completeness analysis of metadata showed that there were dramatic changes in trends over time with a documentation completeness of pre-2000 datasets (12.5% complete) and post-2015 surveys (75.0% complete). The proposed framework gives the hydrographic offices a clear, repeatable and resource efficient framework to evaluate heterogeneous holdings of bathymetric data and come up with evidence-based conclusions on whether the dataset is relevant to various marine tasks.

Keywords : Marine Spatial Data Infrastructure (MSDI), Bathymetric Data Accuracy, Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, CATZOC, Classification

References :

1. Aalders, H. J. G. L., & Moellering, H. (2001). Spatial data infrastructure. Proceedings of the 20th International Cartographic Conference, Beijing, China, 2234–2244.
2. Contarinis, S., Nakos, B., & Pallikaris, A. (2018). Marine Spatial Data Infrastructure in Greece: Challenges and opportunities. Nausivios Chora, 7, E3–E30.
3. Foglini, F., & Grande, V. (2023). A Marine Spatial Data Infrastructure to manage multidisciplinary, inhomogeneous and fragmented geodata in a FAIR perspective: The Adriatic Sea experience. Oceanologia, 65(1), 260–277.
4. Hare, R., Eakins, B., & Amante, C. (2011). Modelling bathymetric uncertainty. The International Hydrographic Review, (6), 31–42.
5. Hasara, K. M. D., Perera, A. N. D., & Gunathilaka, M. D. E. K. (2025). Managing diverse datasets to ensure bathymetric data accuracy in Marine Spatial Data Infrastructure (MSDI). Journal of Geomatics Sabaragamuwa, 5(2), 1–20.
6. Hell, B., Broman, B., Jakobsson, L., Jakobsson, M., Magnusson, A., & Wiberg, P. (2012). The use of bathymetric data in society and science: A review from the Baltic Sea. AMBIO, 41(2), 138–150.
7. Hughes Clarke, J. E. (2018). Multibeam echosounders. In P. T. Harris & E. K. Baker (Eds.), Submarine geomorphology (pp. 25–41). Springer.
8. IHO. (2019). *B-11 The IHO-IOC GEBCO Cook Book*. International Hydrographic Organization.
9. IHO. (2022). *B-12 Guidance to crowdsourced bathymetry* (3rd ed.). International Hydrographic Organization.
10. IHO. (2024). *B-13 Guidance to satellite derived bathymetry* (1st ed.). International Hydrographic Organization.
11. IHO. (2023). *C-17 Spatial Data Infrastructures "The Marine Dimension" Guidance for Hydrographic Offices* (3rd ed.). International Hydrographic Organization.
12. IHO. (2022). *S-44 IHO standards for hydrographic surveys* (6.1.0 ed.). International Hydrographic Organization.
13. IHO. (2020). *S-67 Mariners' guide to accuracy of depth information in Electronic Navigational Charts (ENC)* (1st ed.). International Hydrographic Organization.
14. IHO. (2022). *S-102 Bathymetric surface product specification* (2.1.0 ed.). International Hydrographic Organization.
15. ISO. (2014). *ISO 19115-1:2014 Geographic information — Metadata — Part 1: Fundamentals*. International Organization for Standardization.
16. ISO. (2013). ISO 19157:2013 Geographic information — Data quality. International Organization for Standardization.
17. Kearns, T. A., & Breman, J. (2010). Bathymetry: The art and science of seafloor modeling for modern applications. In Ocean globe (pp. 1–36). ESRI Press.
18. Li, Z., Peng, Z., Zhang, Z., Chu, Y., Xu, C., Yao, S., García-Fernández, Á. F., Zhu, X., Yue, Y., & Levers, A. (2023). Exploring modern bathymetry: A comprehensive review of data acquisition devices, model accuracy, and interpolation techniques for enhanced underwater mapping. Frontiers in Marine Science, 10, 1178845.
19. Lurton, X. (2002). An introduction to underwater acoustics: Principles and applications. Springer Science & Business Media.
20. Mayer, L. A. (2006). Frontiers in seafloor mapping and visualization. Marine Geophysical Researches, 27(1), 7–17.
21. Racetin, I., Kilić Pamuković, J., & Zrinjski, M. (2022). Role of Marine Spatial Data Infrastructure and marine cadastre in a sustainable world. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 10(10), 1407.
22. Tavra, M., Jajac, N., & Cetl, V. (2017). Marine spatial data infrastructure development framework: Croatia case study. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 6(4), 117.
23. Veregin, H. (1999). Data quality parameters. In P. A. Longley, M. F. Goodchild, D. J. Maguire, & D. W. Rhind (Eds.), Geographical information systems (Vol. 1, pp. 177–189). John Wiley & Sons.