Using commonsensical cardinal directions to describe bordering objects
Pages 412 - 415
Abstract
Geographic information systems (GIS) customarily encode spatial information using geometric objects (points, polylines and polygons) and their locations. But people frequently use qualitative relations, such as topological relations (e.g., connection or overlap) or cardinal direction relations (e.g. North or Southeast), to describe spatial scenes. While topological relations have been integrated into modern GIS, direction relations have remained isolated from GIS and are not available for user interaction. Instead, a user must visually infer them from map depictions.
This work uses the problem of generating and interpreting cardinal direction labels that describe the direction between a region and its surrounding neighbors (e.g., all neighbors of a US state) to identify principles for computing more qualitative descriptions of directions that are intuitive to people and to correctly interpret descriptions commonly used by people. This is a step towards bridging the qualitative-quantitative divide between spatial information systems and human conceptualizations of space.
References
[1]
K. Buchin, V. Kusters, B. Speckmann, F. Staals, and B. Vasilescu. 2011. A splitting line model for directional relations. In Intern. Conf. on Advances in Geographic Information Systems (ACM SIGSPATIAL). ACM, 142--151.
[2]
Juan Chen, Dayou Liu, Haiyang Jia, and Changhai Zhang. 2007. Cardinal direction relations in 3D space. In International Conference on Knowledge Science, Engineering and Management. Springer, 623--629.
[3]
Anthony G. Cohn, Brandon Bennett, John M. Gooday, and Nicholas M. Gotts. 1997. Qualitative spatial representation and reasoning with the Region Connection Calculus. GeoInformatica 1 (1997), 275--316.
[4]
Max J. Egenhofer and Robert D. Franzosa. 1991. Point-set topological spatial relations. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 5, 2 (1991), 161--174.
[5]
Andrew U Frank. 1992. Qualitative spatial reasoning about distances and directions in geographic space. J. Vis. Lang. Comput. 3, 4 (1992), 343--371.
[6]
Andrew U Frank. 1996. Qualitative spatial reasoning: Cardinal directions as an example. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 10, 3 (1996), 269--290.
[7]
Christian Freksa. 1992. Using orientation information for qualitative spatial reasoning. In Theories and methods of spatio-temporal reasoning in geographic space. Springer, 162--178.
[8]
R Goyal and Max J Egenhofer. 1997. The direction-relation matrix: A representation for directions relations between extended spatial objects. USGIS annual retreat 3 (1997), 95--102.
[9]
Roop Goyal and Max J. Egenhofer. 2000. Consistent queries over cardinal directions across different levels of detail. In Int. Workshop on Database and Expert Systems Applications. IEEE, 876--880.
[10]
Alexander Klippel, Jan Oliver Wallgrün, Jinlong Yang, and Kevin Sparks. 2015. Intuitive Direction Concepts. Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication 10, 1 (2015), 3.
[11]
Lars Kulik, Carola Eschenbach, Christopher Habel, and Hedda Rahel Schmidtke. 2002. A graded approach to directions between extended objects. In Int. Conf. on Geographic Inf. Sci. (GIScience-02). Springer, 119--131.
[12]
Yohei Kurata and Hui Shi. 2009. Toward heterogeneous cardinal direction calculus. In German Conf. Artif. Intell. (KI-09) (LNCS 5803). Springer, 452--459.
[13]
G. Ligozat. 1998. Reasoning about Cardinal Directions. J. Vis. Lang. Comput. 9, 3 (1998), 23--44.
[14]
Weiming Liu, Xiaotong Zhang, Sanjiang Li, and Mingsheng Ying. 2010. Reasoning about cardinal directions between extended objects. Artif. Intell. 174, 12 (2010), 951 -- 983.
[15]
Till Mossakowski and Reinhard Moratz. 2012. Qualitative reasoning about relative direction of oriented points. Artif. Intell. 180 (2012), 34 -- 45.
[16]
Isabel Navarrete and Guido Sciavicco. 2006. Spatial reasoning with rectangular cardinal direction relations. In Workshop on Spatial and Temporal Reasoning at ECAI-06. 1--10.
[17]
Dimitris Papadias, Max Egenhofer, and Jayant Sharma. 1996. Hierarchical reasoning about direction relations. In ACM Workshop on Advances in Geographic Information Systems (ACM GIS 1996). ACM, 105--112.
[18]
D. Peuquet and Z. Ci-Xiang. 1987. An algorithm to determine the directional relationship between arbitrarily-shaped polygons in the plane. Pattern Recognition 20, 1 (1987), 65--74.
[19]
Jochen Renz and Debasis Mitra. 2004. Qualitative direction calculi with arbitrary granularity. In Pacific Rim Int. Conf. on Artif. Intell. (PRICAI-04). 65--74.
[20]
Markus Schneider, Tao Chen, Ganesh Viswanathan, and Wenjie Yuan. 2012. Cardinal directions between complex regions. ACM Transactions on Database Systems (TODS) 37, 2 (2012), 8.
[21]
Spiros Skiadopoulos and Manolis Koubarakis. 2004. Composing cardinal direction relations. Artif. Intell. 152, 2 (2004), 143--171.
[22]
Spiros Skiadopoulos, Nikos Sarkas, Timos Sellis, and Manolis Koubarakis. 2007. A family of directional relation models for extended objects. IEEE Transactions on knowledge and data engineering 19, 8 (2007), 1116--1130.
[23]
Diedrich Wolter and Jae Hee Lee. 2010. Qualitative reasoning with directional relations. Artif. Intell. 174, 18 (2010), 1498--1507.
Index Terms
- Using commonsensical cardinal directions to describe bordering objects
Recommendations
Reasoning mechanism for cardinal direction relations
AIMSA'10: Proceedings of the 14th international conference on Artificial intelligence: methodology, systems, and applicationsIn the classical Projection-based Model for cardinal directions [6], a two-dimensional Euclidean space relative to an arbitrary single-piece region, a, is partitioned into the following nine tiles: North-West, NW(a); North, N(a); North-East, NE(a); West,...
Cardinal directions between spatial objects: the pairwise-consistency problem
The paper formalizes an open-problem (called by the authors the pairwise-consistency problem) which is relevant in the context of cardinal directions among extended objects, proposes an efficient algorithmic solution for it, discusses the implementation ...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
November 2018
655 pages
ISBN:9781450358897
DOI:10.1145/3274895
- General Chairs:
- Farnoush Banaei-Kashani,
- Erik Hoel,
- Program Chairs:
- Ralf Hartmut Güting,
- Roberto Tamassia,
- Li Xiong
Copyright © 2018 Owner/Author.
Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.
Sponsors
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 06 November 2018
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Poster
Funding Sources
Conference
SIGSPATIAL '18
Sponsor:
SIGSPATIAL '18: 26th ACM SIGSPATIAL International Conference on Advances in Geographic Information Systems
November 6 - 9, 2018
Washington, Seattle
Acceptance Rates
SIGSPATIAL '18 Paper Acceptance Rate 30 of 150 submissions, 20%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 220 of 1,116 submissions, 20%
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 254Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)62
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)8
Reflects downloads up to 10 Nov 2024
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
Get Access
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in