“Simplest” Paths: Automated Route Selection for Navigation
- 1.2k Downloads
Numerous cognitive studies have indicated that the form and complexity of route instructions may be as important to human navigators as the overall length of route. Most automated navigation systems rely on computing the solution to the shortest path problem, and not the problem of finding the “simplest” path. This paper addresses the issue of finding the “simplest” paths through a network, in terms of the instruction complexity. We propose a “simplest” paths algorithm that has quadratic computation time for a planar graph. An empirical study of the algorithm’s performance, based on an established cognitive model of navigation instruction complexity, revealed that the length of a simplest path was on average only 16% longer than the length of the corresponding shortest path. In return for marginally longer routes, the simplest path algorithm seems to offer considerable advantages over shortest paths in terms of their ease of description and execution. The conclusions indicate several areas for future research: in particular cognitive studies are needed to verify these initial computational results. Potentially, the simplest paths algorithm could be used to replace shortest paths algorithms in any automated system for generating human navigation instructions, including in-car navigation systems, Internet driving direction servers, and other location-based services.
KeywordsNavigation wayfinding route selection shortest path instruction complexity
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.Streeter, L., Vitello, D.: A profile of driver’s map-reading abilities. Human Factors 28, 223–239 (1986)Google Scholar
- 3.Golledge, R.: Path selection and route preference in human navigation: A progress report. In: Kuhn, W., Frank, A.U. (eds.) COSIT 1995. LNCS, vol. 988, pp. 207–222. Springer, Heidelberg (1995)Google Scholar
- 7.Richter, K.F., Klippel, A.: You-are-here maps.: Wayfinding support as location based service. In: Moltgen, J., Wytzisk, A., eds.: GI-Technologien für Verkehr und Logistik. IfGI Prints 13, Münster (2002)Google Scholar
- 11.Liu, B.: Using knowledge to isolate search in route finding. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI 1995, Montréal, Québec, Canada, vol. 1, pp. 119–125. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1995)Google Scholar
- 12.Liu, B.: Intelligent route finding: combining knowledge, cases and an efficient search algorithm. In: 12th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI 1996), Budapest, Hungary, pp. 380–384. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester (1996)Google Scholar
- 17.Mark, D.M.: Finding simple routes: ’ease of description’ as an objective function in automated route selection. In: Proceedings, 2nd Symposium on Artificial Intelligence Applications (IEEE), Miami Beach, pp. 577–581 (1985)Google Scholar
- 19.Pallottino, S., Scutell‘a, M.: Shortest path algorithms in transportation models: Classical and innovative aspects. In: Marcotte, P., Nguyen, S. (eds.) Equilibrium and Advanced Transportation Modelling, pp. 245–281. Kluwer, Amsterdam (1998)Google Scholar
- 23.Denis, M.: The description of routes: A cognitive approach to the production of spatial discourse. Cahiers de Psychologie Cognitive 16, 409–458 (1997)Google Scholar
- 24.Kuipers, B.: Representing Knowledge of Large-Scale Space. PhD thesis, Mathematics Department, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (1977), Technical Report 418, M.I.T. Artificial Intelligence LaboratoryGoogle Scholar
- 26.Chown, E., Kaplan, S., Kortenkamp, D.: Prototypes, location and associative networks (plan): Towards a unified theory of cognitive mapping. Journal of Cognitive Science 19 (1995)Google Scholar