1. The online service isn't a "True" composite locator. It works differently and has additional functionality in it that can work this way.
2. We are actually changing the Minimum Match Score for the online service to be 93 as well for the USA and because your just using batch and Minimum Candidate Score is only used in FindAddressCandidates this is a pretty safe change that will actually reduce potential false positive matches.
3. This option is much higher risk than #2 above.
Thanks for the info! I will change the Minimum Candidate and Minimum Match Scores for AddressPoint to 93 to test. Thanks!
A side question, but still kind of related to the geocoding algorithm ---
Our current geocoding procedure is
1. address standardization -- prep clean the addresses, including removal of confusing or redundant components such as suite numbers or p.o. boxes
2. address "cleansing" using 3rd party software such as QAS (I don't quite know what's in their box)
3. feed the "cleaned" address to ESRI geocoder
I have noticed there are various alias name settings in the .loc.xml files, so I assume the geocoder does address standardization as a prep step before doing actual address matching. So I was wondering if some of our procedures might be redundant? In all, I want to know what you would recommend as a cleansing step, in order to get the best out of the geocoder? Thank you.
Although we do handle the removal of confusing or redundant components while matching you may see a slightly better (1-2%) geocoding result if you use the standardization and "cleansing" process before. It really depends on how bad the input address data is first and how good the standardization and "cleansing" tools are. If I were you, I might give it a try with and without and see what the difference is. You might see that you get little or even no better results.
Thanks Brad. We've done various comparisons and the results are not self explanatory themselves. Sometimes it could be better and sometimes worse. You are right that it depends on how good the cleansing tool is, and unfortunately I am not confident QAS is a good tool.
If anyone sees this post, I would appreciate it if someone can recommend a good address cleansing tool. Thanks in advance.
Also Brad, maybe I direct your attention to my other post here about geocoder again:
Thanks for the information and suggestions!
Similarly, one of our agencies was frustrated with the same thing. There doesn't seem to be an option to allow the candidate among individual address locators with the highest score to be automatically selected as the match in a composite address locator - or, at least I couldn't find that option in any documentation or discussion thread yet. So, last week I created Composite Address Locators by Score in ArcGIS Ideas.
Is such modification possible, and if so, how would it be done?
Sincerely, Nathan Lowry
GIS Outreach Coordinator
P 303.764.7801 | F 303.764.7764
601 East 18th Avenue, Suite 220, Desk D-23, Denver, CO 80203-1494
How am I doing? Please contact my manager Jon Gottsegen (firstname.lastname@example.org) for comments or questions.