NATIONAL PHD IN HERITAGE SCIENCE

Thesis title: Approaching the Cultural Heritage Domain through Comparative Geomatics: Methods for Knowledge, Interpretation and Representation

The progressive digitisation of Cultural Heritage has profoundly transformed both the methodologies and epistemologies of documentation. The integration of geomatics technologies has transformed the measurement, interpretation, and preservation of monuments, landscapes, and artefacts. However, although the precision and automation of these tools have enhanced the quality and reliability of heritage documentation, they have also led to new enquiries regarding the meaning of accuracy, data transparency, and the interpretative role of the researcher. This dissertation aims to contextualise these transformations within an integrated theoretical and methodological framework that combines technological precision with cultural comprehension. Building on historical and philosophical reflections, the study recognises comparison as a fundamental cognitive practice in both the humanities and the sciences. From art history and archaeology to geodesy and computer vision, comparison has long served as a means of producing knowledge through the analysis and interpretation of differences. The philosophy of comparison outlined in the early chapters establishes the conceptual foundation for this research term. Comparative Geomatics is a way of looking at datasets, models, and time periods where comparing them is not just a way to check results but how we create meaning and ensure reliability. This dissertation develops and validates the concept of Comparative Geomatics as both a scientific paradigm and a professional methodology through three experimental contexts: cartographic comparison using GIS, the assessment of multi-sensor 3D acquisition tools, and the diachronic monitoring of medieval towers. The research demonstrates that comparison operates simultaneously as a technical method, a conceptual framework, and an epistemological principle. In the study of historical cartography, comparative GIS analysis demonstrates that discrepancies between early modern maps and contemporary data are not mere inaccuracies but reflections of cultural and symbolic order. In evaluating 3D acquisition systems, the cross-comparison of different sensors shows that accuracy is a relational property emerging from the interplay of tools, contexts, and expectations. In diachronic monitoring, the study of successive surveys converts measurement into a historical endeavour, enabling the tracking of both material deformation and the progression of surveying knowledge. The results highlight the innovative potential of comparative analysis to bridge precision and interpretation. By integrating heterogeneous datasets, instruments, and temporal layers within a coherent methodological framework, Comparative Geomatics ensures the rigour and transparency of documentation while expanding its interpretative depth. The study demonstrates that diversity among data sources and acquisition methods is not a limitation but a generator of reliability: systematic comparison becomes an operational strategy to verify results, expose uncertainties, and contextualise spatial information within its cultural and historical framework. The research recognises comparison as the generative core of heritage geomatics. It proposes an innovative, relational approach that transforms measurement into a reflective process of knowledge construction, capable of linking the scientific precision of Geomatics with the interpretative aims of the humanities and of shaping new paradigms for digital heritage research and practice.