Oriented Regions for Linearly Conceptualized Features
The typical phenomena in geographic space are 2-dimensional or 3-dimensional in nature, yet people often conceptualize some of them as 1-dimensional entities embedded in a 2-dimensional space—rivers have widths and depths, and extent across the surface of the Earth, but for some tasks they are thought of as linear objects; likewise, roads as travel paths have widths as they wind through the landscape, but in some scenarios the extent is ignored and only connectivity between points along the path is considered. A critical property that makes these features special is the orientation that is attached (e.g., through the flow of the water or the traffic directions imposed by an authority). Contemporary spatial models capture such features either 1-dimensionally as networks of lines or directed lines, or 2-dimensionally simply as regions, each abstracting away one key property—in the case of the network the features’ extents and connections to neighboring areas, and in the case of regions their orientations. This paper introduces oriented regions as a model that preserves the key properties from both abstractions. Key properties of this approach are the sequences in which the boundaries of oriented regions interact, and the placement of objects with respect to the topological hull of a set of oriented regions. This model, dubbed hull+i, is based on topological hulls and the i-notation, a systematic method to capture boundary interactions between oriented regions, and provides a means for representing entire spatial scenes with an arbitrary number of objects, separations, and instances where ensembles of objects surround other objects.
KeywordsTopological Relation Oriented Region Conceptual Neighborhood Region Connection Calculus Multiple Lane
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 3.Barkowsky, T., Latecki, L.J., Richter, K.-F.: Schematizing Maps: Simplification of Geographic Shape by Discrete Curve Evolution. In: Habel, C., Brauer, W., Freksa, C., Wender, K.F. (eds.) Spatial Cognition II. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1849, pp. 41–53. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)Google Scholar
- 6.Cohn, A., Renz, J.: Qualitative Spatial Representation and Reasoning. In: van Hermelen, F., Lifschitz, V., Porter, B. (eds.) Handbook of Knowledge Representation, pp. 551–596 (2008)Google Scholar
- 9.Egenhofer, M.: Definitions of Line-Line Relations for Geographic Databases. IEEE Data Engineering Bulletin 16(3), 40–45 (1993)Google Scholar
- 14.Egenhofer, M., Herring, J.: Categorizing Binary Topological Relationships Between Regions, Lines, and Points in Geographic Databases, Department of Surveying Engineering, University of Maine, Orono, ME (1991)Google Scholar
- 16.Egenhofer, M., Sharma, J., Mark, D.: A Critical Comparison of the 4-Intersection and 9-Intersection Models for Spatial Relations: Formal Analysis. In: McMaster, R., Armstrong, M. (eds.) Autocarto-Conferance, Minneapolis, MN, vol. 11, pp. 1–11 (1993)Google Scholar
- 20.Klippel, A., Li, R., Yang, J., Hardisty, F., Xu, S.: The Egenhofer-Cohn Hypothesis or, Topological Relativity? In: Raubal, M., Mark, D., Frank, A. (eds.) Cognitive and Linguistic Aspects of Geographic Space, pp. 195–215. Springer (2013)Google Scholar
- 26.Mark, D., Egenhofer, M.: Modeling Spatial Relations between Lines and Regions: Combining Formal Mathematical Models and Human Subjects Testing. Cartography and Geographic Information Systems 21(3), 195–212 (1994)Google Scholar
- 28.Moratz, R., Renz, J., Wolter, D.: Qualitative Spatial Reasoning about Line Segments. In: Horn, W. (ed.) Proceedings of the 14th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, ECAI 2000, Berlin, pp. 234–238 (2000)Google Scholar
- 29.Morehouse, S.: GIS-Based Map Compilation and Generalization. In: Müller, J.-C., Lagrange, J., Weibel, R. (eds.) GIS and Generalization: Methodology and Practice, pp. 21–30. Taylor&Francis, Bristol (1995)Google Scholar
- 31.Reis, R., Egenhofer, M., Matos, J.: Topological Relations Using Two Models of Uncertainty for Lines. In: Caetano, M., Painho, M. (eds.) 7th International Symposium on Spatial Accuracy Assessment in Natural Resources and Environmental Sciences, Lisbon, Portugal, pp. 5–7 (2006)Google Scholar
- 32.Reis, R., Egenhofer, M., Matos, J.: Conceptual Neighborhoods of Topological Relations between Lines. In: Ruas, A., Gold, C. (eds.) Headway in Spatial Data Handling, pp. 557–574. Springer (2008)Google Scholar
- 33.Ruas, A., Lagrange, J.: Data and Knowledge Modelling for Generalization. In: Müller, J., Lagrange, J., Weibel, R. (eds.) GIS and Generalization: Methodology and Practice, pp. 73–90. Taylor&Francis, Bristol (1995)Google Scholar