2

I have a composite address locator that cascades through three sub-locators. The issue is when I run the Geocode Addresses tool, it chooses the best match based on the order of locators, not the score of the candidates. So let's say I have these results:

  • Locator 1: score of 90%
  • Locator 2: score of 100%
  • Locator 3: score of 75%

It will always choose the match from Locator 1 (provided it's above the minimum score threshold), even though there's a better fit from Locator 2. Similarly, if I publish this as an ArcGIS Server REST service the results are ordered by locator. This seems like a bug to me -- does anyone know of a workaround? Is this configurable somewhere?

closed as off-topic by PolyGeo Dec 11 '18 at 4:04

  • This question does not appear to be about geographic information systems (GIS) within the scope defined in the help center.
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • That's how a composite locator functions - fail first, go to next. If a match is found above the minimum score allowed, it's a match and there's no reason to run it through the next one. The only way I can see would be to filtering it down with selection criteria first, but that implies there's some criteria that would ensure a better result from one locator than another. Increasing the minimum scores across the board wouldn't really work because there's no way to predict if you'll have a better score or not. – Chris W Dec 9 '14 at 19:57
  • I suppose maybe you could add the locators multiple times with different minimum scores, so it gets more tolerant as it works its way down the list - say 90% on the first use, 70% on second or something. Don't know if that would work or not and it doesn't completely solve the issue without really narrow score bands on each iteration even if it does. – Chris W Dec 9 '14 at 20:01
  • Interesting idea to add them multiple times - I tried but it's complaining about the duplicates. I guess what I'm after is a composite locator where the cascade doesn't matter. I just want the best result! hint hint, Esri – Rob Dec 10 '14 at 15:08
  • Figured that would be too easy. But shouldn't your locators automatically have a 'best result' hierarchy? I mean a 65% match on street address is going to be more accurate than a 100% match on zip. I'm curious as to the build of the different locators that they would turn up such different results from the same inputs. Perhaps you run them all separately, write the score as an attribute, then use only the highest scoring result for any given point? Otherwise, you might want to suggest an ArcGIS Idea (or see if it's already there). – Chris W Dec 10 '14 at 19:23
  • I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it seems to be trying to use GIS SE as a mechanism to submit an enhancement request to Esri. – PolyGeo Dec 11 '18 at 4:04
0

From your comment:

Interesting idea to add them multiple times - I tried but it's complaining about the duplicates. I guess what I'm after is a composite locator where the cascade doesn't matter. I just want the best result! hint hint, Esri

it seems apparent that the way forward on this one will be to submit an ArcGIS Idea and/or look for the functionality you seek in ArcGIS Pro.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.