Track papers across labs, topics, and trends.
Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
To resolve conflicting quality claims in planetary-scale urban mapping, this study benchmarks seven global building products—including Overture Maps, Google Open Buildings 2.5D Temporal, and Microsoft TEMPO—against harmonized reference footprints across 135 study sites. Overture achieved the highest vector accuracy (median city-level F1 of 0.786), whereas raster performance inverted across spatial resolutions, with Google OBT leading at 10m (0.642 F1) and WSF Tracker leading at 100m (0.862 F1) despite persistent surface overestimation. Crucially, correcting for temporal mismatch between satellite acquisition and ground truth recovered up to 0.060 in mean F1, revealing that unaligned temporal drift systematically penalizes evaluated model performance in fast-growing regions.
Global building layers show stark, resolution-dependent divergence: Overture dominates vector accuracy (0.786 F1), but raster rankings invert between 10m and 100m resolutions while temporal drift silently suppresses benchmark scores by up to 0.060 F1 in expanding cities.
Global building and settlement datasets increasingly support population mapping, exposure assessment, urban monitoring, and other analyses of the built environment, yet comparative evidence remains fragmented across products, geographic regions, reference datasets, spatial scales, and evaluation methods. We benchmark seven global or near-global products, including Overture Maps, Global Building Atlas, 3D-GloBFP, Google Open Buildings 2.5D Temporal (OBT), Microsoft TEMPO, GHSL, and WSF Tracker, against harmonized reference footprints across 135 study areas. The evaluation combines complementary measures of detection, geometric agreement, and aggregate quantity accuracy, together with stratified analyses of settlement characteristics and diagnostic experiments on error size and temporal alignment. Overture achieved the highest median city-level vector F1 (0.786). Raster rankings were resolution-dependent: OBT achieved the highest median F1 at 10m (0.642), whereas WSF Tracker led at 100m (0.862). However, WSF Tracker substantially overestimated built-up area, emphasizing that when using raster products, it is important for the user to understand whether the raster identifies only buildings or includes additional impervious surfaces. Raster accuracy increased consistently with building density (Spearman \r{ho} = 0.58-0.75), while small candidate buildings were disproportionately associated with false positives in the vector products. Temporally aligning WSF Tracker with reference imagery increased mean F1 by 0.060 (median +0.037), indicating that the reported accuracies are conservative in rapidly growing areas. The study establishes a reproducible benchmark for comparing heterogeneous global urban and settlement layer datasets across geographic and settlement contexts.