Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparing G-maps with other topological data structures

  • Published:
GeoInformatica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article compares two approaches to storing spatial information: On the one hand there are topological datatypes where primitives and their connectivity are explicitly stored, on the other hand there is the G-maps-approach storing abstract “darts” and groups acting on these darts such that their orbits implicitly give the elements and topology of the stored space. First these concepts are mutually related from a categorial viewpoint and, second, their storage complexity is compared.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Alexandroff P (1937) Diskrete Räume. Mat Sb 44(2):501–519

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bradley PE, Paul N (2010) Using the relational model to capture topological information of spaces. Comput J 53(1):69–89

    Google Scholar 

  3. Brisson E (1993) Representing geometric structures in d dimensions: topology and order. Discret Comput Geom 9:387–426

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Grasset-Simon C, Damiand G, Lienhardt P (2006) nD generalized map pyramids: definition, representations and basic operations. Pattern Recogn 39(4):527–538

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Hartshorne R (1977) Algebraic Geometry. Springer, New York

  6. Kraemer P, Cazier D, Bechmann D (2009) Extension of half-edges for the representation of multiresolution subdivision surfaces. Visual Comput 25:149–163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Lienhardt P (1994) N-dimensional generalized combinatorial maps and cellular quasi-manifolds. Int J Comput Geom Appl 4:275–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Mäntylä M (1988) An introduction to solid modeling. Computer Science, Rockville, MD

    Google Scholar 

  9. Paul N (2008) Topologische Datenbanken für Architektonische Räume. Dissertation, Universität Karlsruhe

  10. Paul N (2010) Basic topological notions and their relation to BIM. In: Underwood J, Isikdag U (ed) Handbook of research on building information modeling and construction informatics—information science reference, pp 451–472

  11. Schneps L (ed) (1994) The Grothendieck theory of Dessins d’Enfants. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  12. Sloane NJA (ed) (2012) Number of self-inverse permutations on n letters, also known as involutions; number of Young tableaux with n cells. In: On-line encyclopedia of integer sequences. http://www.research.att.com/~njas/sequences/A000085

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge support from the DFG-projects BR 3513/3, and BR 2128/12 and many valuable comments from the anonymous reviewers.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institut für Photogrammetrie und Fernerkundung, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Kaiserstraße 12, 76128, Karlsruhe, Germany

    Patrick Erik Bradley

  2. Geodätisches Institut Karlsruhe, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Kaiserstraße 7, 76128, Karlsruhe, Germany

    Norbert Paul

Authors
  1. Patrick Erik Bradley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Norbert Paul
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Norbert Paul.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bradley, P.E., Paul, N. Comparing G-maps with other topological data structures. Geoinformatica 18, 595–620 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10707-013-0191-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10707-013-0191-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation