GeoInformatica

, Volume 11, Issue 4, pp 479–496 | Cite as

A Relative Representation of Trajectories in Geogaphical Spaces

  • Valérie Noyon
  • Christophe Claramunt
  • Thomas Devogele
Article

Abstract

The research presented in this paper introduces a relative representation of trajectories in space and time. The objective is to represent space the way it is perceived by a moving observer acting in the environment, and to provide a complementary view to the usual absolute vision of space. Trajectories are characterized from the perception of a moving observer where relative positions and relative velocities are the basic primitives. This allows for a formal identification of elementary trajectory configurations, and their relationships with the regions that compose the environment. The properties of the model are studied, including transitions and composition tables. These properties characterize trajectory transitions by the underlying processes that semantically qualify them. The approach provides a representation that might help the understanding of trajectory patterns in space and time.

Keywords

spatio-temporal modelling spatial qualitative reasoning trajectories 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    T. Abraham and J. Roddick. “Survey of spatio-temporal databases,” Geoinformatica, Vol. 3(1):61–99, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    J. F. Allen. “Maintaining knowledge about temporal intervals,” Communication of ACM, Vol. 26(11):832–843, 1983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    M. Egenhofer. “Reasoning about Binary Topological Relations,” in O. Gunther and H.-J. Schek (Eds.), Proc. of the 2nd Symposium on Large Spatial Databases, Zürich, Switzerland, pp. 143–160, 1991.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    C. Freksa. “Temporal reasoning based on semi-intervals,” Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 54(1):199–227, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    A. Galton. “A qualitative approach to continuity,” in P. Amsili, M. Borillo, and L. Vieu (Eds.), Proc. of the 5th International Workshop on Time, Space and Movement: Meaning and Knowledge in the Sensible World (TSM’95), Toulouse, France, pp. 17–30, 1995.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    A. Galton. Qualitative Spatial Change. Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2000.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    J. Gibson. The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Boston, MA, 1979.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    R. Güting, M. Böhlen, M. Erwig, C. Jensen, N. Lorentzos, M. Schneider, and M. Vazirgiannis. “A foundation for representing and querying moving objects,” ACM Transactions on Database Systems, Vol. 25(1):1–42, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    R. Güting and M. Schneider. Moving objects databases. Morgan Kaufmann: San Fransisco, CA, 2005.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    D. Hernandez and E. Jungert. “Qualitative motion of point-like objects,” Journal of Visual Languages and Computing, Vol. 10:269–289, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    B. Huang and C. Claramunt. “STOQL: An ODMG-based spatio-temporal object model and query language,” in D. Richardson and P. Oosterom (Eds.), Proc. of the 9th Spatial Data Handling Symposium, Ottawa, Canada, pp. 225–237, Springer, 2002.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    S. Imfeld. Time, points and space—towards a better analysis of wildlife data in GIS. PhD report. University of Zürich, Switzerland, 2000.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    G. Kollios, D. Gunopulos, and V. J. Tsotras. “On indexing mobile objects,” in PODS ’99: Proc. of the 18th ACM SIGMOD-SIGACT-SIGART Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, pp. 261–272, ACM Press, 1999.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    I. Lazaridis, K. Porkaew, and S. Mehrotra. “Dynamic queries over mobile objects,” in Proc. of the 8th International Conference on Extending Database Technology, Prague, Czech Republic, pp. 269–286, 2002.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    S. Levinson. “Studying spatial conceptualization across cultures: anthropology and cognitive science,” The Journal of the Society for Psychological Anthropology, Vol. 26(1):7–24, 1998.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    W. Maass. “A cognitive model for the process of multimodal, incremental route descriptions,” in A. Frank and I. Campari (Eds.), Spatial Information Theory: Theoretical Basis for GIS, Marciana Marina, Elba Island, Italy, volume 716, Lectures Notes in Computer Science, pp. 1–13, Springer, 1993.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    M. Mokbel, T. Ghanem, and W. Aref. “Spatio-temporal access methods,” IEEE Data Engineering Bulletin, Vol. 26(2):40–49, 2003.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    T. Morineau, J.-M. Hoc, and P. Denecker. “Cognitive control levels in air traffic radar controller activity,” International Journal of Aviation Psychology, Vol. 13(2):107–130, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    D. Pfoser. “Indexing the trajectories of moving objects,” IEEE Data Engineering Bulletin, Vol. 25(2):3–9, 2002.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    D. Pfoser and Y. Theodoridis. “Generating semantics-based trajectories of moving objects,” in Proc. of the International Workshop on Emerging Technologies for Geo-Based Applications, Ascona, Switzerland, pp. 59–76, 2000.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    K. Porkaew. Database support for similarity retrieveal and querying mobile objects. PhD report. University of Illinois at Chicago, IL, 2000.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    D. Randell, Z. Cui and A. Cohn. “A Spatial Logic Based on Regions and Connection,” in B. Nebel, C. Rich and W. Swartout (Eds.), Proc. of the Third International Conference Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR’92), San Mateo, CA, pp. 165–176, 1992.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    S. Saltenis, C. Jensen, S. Leutenegger, and M. Lopez. “Indexing the positions of continuously moving objects,” in W. Chen, J. Naughton, and P. Bernstein (Eds.), Proc. of the 19th ACM-SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, Dallas, TX, pp. 331–342, 2000.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    C. Schlieder. “A computational account of preferences in mental model construction,” in U. Schmid, J. Krems, and F. Wysotzki (Eds.), Proc. of the First European Workshop on Cognitive Modeling, Berlin, Germany, pp. 90–96, 1996.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    C. Shahabi, M. Kolahdouzan, S. Thakkar, J. Ambite, and C. Knoblock. “Efficiently querying moving objects with pre-defined paths in a distrituted environment,” in Proc. of the 9th ACM International Symposium on Advances in Geographic Information Systems (ACM-GIS), Atlanta, GA, pp. 34–40, ACM Press, 2001.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    A. Sistla, O. Wolfson, S. Chamberlain, and S. Dao. “Modeling and querying moving objects,” in International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE), Birmingham, UK, pp. 422–432, IEEE Computer Society, 1997.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    J. Su, H. Xu, and O. Ibarra. “Moving objects: logical relationships and queries,” in C. Jensen, M. Schneider, B. Seeger, and V. Tsotras (Eds.), Proc. of the 7th International Symposium on Spatial and Temporal Databases (SSTD), Los Angeles, CA, volume 2121, Lectures Notes in Computer Science, pp. 3–19, Springer, 2001.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    B. Tversky. “Cognitive maps, cognitive collages, and spatial mental models,” in A. Frank and I. Campari (Eds.), Spatial Information Theory: Theoretical Basis for GIS, Marciana Marina, Elba Island, Italy, volume 716, Lectures Notes in Computer Science, pp. 14–24, Springer, 1993.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    N. Van de Weghe, B. Kuijpers, P. Bogaert, and P. D. Maeyer. “A qualitative trajectory calculus and the composition of its relations,” in L. Delcambre, C. Kop, H. Mayr, J. Mylopoulos and O. Pastor (Eds.), Proceedings of the first International Conference on GeoSpatial Semantics, Klagenfurt, Austria, volume 3799, Lectures Notes in Computer Science, pp. 60–76, Springer, 2005.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    L. Vieu. “Spatial Representation and Reasoning in Artificial Intelligence,” in O. Stock (Ed.) Spatial and Temporal Reasoning, pp. 3–41, Kluwer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1997.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    M. Worboys and M. Duckham. GIS: A Computing Perspective. 2nd edition, CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, 2004.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Valérie Noyon
    • 1
  • Christophe Claramunt
    • 1
  • Thomas Devogele
    • 1
  1. 1.Naval Academy Research InstituteBrestFrance

Personalised recommendations