GeoInformatica

, Volume 17, Issue 2, pp 235–255 | Cite as

Directional relations and frames of reference

Article

Abstract

As an intermediate category between metric and topology, directional relations are as much varied as “right of”, “before”, “between”, “in front of”, “back”, “north of”, “east of”, and so on. Directional relations are ambiguous if taken alone without the contextual information described by frames of reference. In this paper, we identify a unifying framework for directional relations and frames of reference, which shows how a directional relation with its associated frame of reference can be mapped to a projective relation of the 5-intersection model. We discuss how this knowledge can be integrated in spatial query languages.

Keywords

Spatial relation Frame of reference Directional relation Projective relation Spatial taxonomy 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank the anonymous reviewers and the area editor for suggesting important new insights to the first submitted version of this paper.

References

  1. 1.
    Bloch I, Ralescu A (2003) Directional relative position between objects in image processing: a comparison between fuzzy approaches. Pattern Recognit 36:1563–1582CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Liu X, Shekhar S, Chawla S (2003) Object-based directional query processing in spatial databases. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 15(2):295–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Worboys M, Duckham M, Kulik L (2004) Commonsense notions of proximity and direction in environmental space. Spat Cogn Comput 4(4):285–312Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wolter D, Lee JH (2010) Qualitative reasoning with directional relations. Artif Intell 174:1498–1507CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Clementini E, Di Felice P, Hernández D (1997) Qualitative representation of positional information. Artif Intell 95(2):317–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Frank AU (1992) Qualitative reasoning about distances and directions in geographic space. J Vis Lang Comput 3(4):343–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Freksa C (1992) Using orientation information for qualitative spatial reasoning. In: Frank AU, Campari I, Formentini U (eds) Theories and methods of spatio-temporal reasoning in geographic space - International Conference GIS - From space to territory: theories and methods of spatio-temporal reasoning, September 21–23, 1992, Pisa, Italy, vol 639. LNCS. Springer, Berlin, pp 162–178Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hernández D (1993) Maintaining qualitative spatial knowledge. In: Frank AU, Campari I (eds) Spatial information theory: a theoretical basis for GIS - European conference, COSIT’93, vol 716. LNCS. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp 36–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ligozat GF (1993) Qualitative triangulation for spatial reasoning. In: Frank AU, Campari I (eds) Spatial information theory: a theoretical basis for GIS: European conference, COSIT’93, September 19–22, 1993, Marciana Marina, Elba Island, Italy, vol 716. LNCS. Springer Verlag, Berlin, pp 54–68Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Schlieder C (1995) Reasoning about ordering. In: Frank AU, Kuhn W (eds) Spatial information theory: a theoretical basis for GIS - Int. Conf., COSIT’95, vol 988. LNCS. Springer, Berlin, pp 341–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Goyal R, Egenhofer MJ (1997) The direction-relation matrix: a representation of direction relations for extended spatial objects. In: UCGIS annual assembly and summer retreat, Bar Harbor, MEGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Clementini E, Billen R (2006) Modeling and computing ternary projective relations between regions. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 18(6):799–814CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Levinson SC (1996) Frames of reference and Molyneux’s question: crosslinguistic evidence. In: Bloom P, Peterson MA, Nadel L, Garrett MF (eds) Language and space. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachussets, pp 109–169Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Klatzky RL (1998) Allocentric and egocentric spatial representations: definitions, distinctions, and interconnections. In: Freksa C, Habel C, Wender KF (eds) Spatial cognition: an interdisciplinary approach to representing and processing spatial knowledge vol 1404. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence. Springer, Berlin, pp 1–17Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Frank AU (1998) Formal models for cognition — Taxonomy of spatial location description and frames of reference. In: Freksa C, Habel C, Wender KF (eds) Spatial cognition: an interdisciplinary approach to representing and processing spatial knowledge vol 1404. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence. Springer, Berlin, pp 293–312Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hernández D (1994) Qualitative representation of spatial knowledge, vol 804. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Eschenbach C (1999) Geometric structures of frames of reference and natural language semantics. Spat Comput Cogn 1(4):329–348Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Eschenbach C, Habel C, Leßmöllmann A (1997) The interpretation of complex spatial relations by integrating frames of reference. Paper presented at the Workshop “Language and Space” (AAAI-97), Rhode IslandGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Moratz R, Tenbrink T (2006) Spatial reference in linguistic human-robot interaction: iterative, empirically supported development of a model of projective relations. Spat Cogn Comput 6(1):63–107Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Retz-Schmidt G (1988) Various views on spatial prepositions. AI Mag 9(2):95–105Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cohn AG, Renz J (2007) Qualitative spatial representation and reasoning. In: Harmelen Fv, Lifschitz V, Porter B (eds) Handbook of knowledge representation, 1. Elsevier, pp 551–596Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bloch I, Colliot O, Cesar RM Jr (2006) On the ternary spatial relation “Between”. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern B Cybern 36(2):312–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Majid A, Bowerman M, Kita S, Haun DBM, Levinson SC (2004) Can language restructure cognition? The case for space. Trends Cogn Sci 8(3):108–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gallistel CR (2002) Language and spatial frames of reference in mind and brain. Trends Cogn Sci 6(8):321–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Cai G (2007) Contextualization of geospatial database semantics for Human–GIS Interaction. GeoInformatica 11(2):217–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ishikawa T, Kiyomoto M (2008) Turn to the left or to the west: verbal navigational directions in relative and absolute frames of reference. In: Cova TJ, Miller HJ, Beard K, Frank AU, Goodchild MF (eds) Geographic information science, 5th International Conference, GIScience 2008, Park City, UT, USA, September 23–26, 2008., vol 5266. LNCS. Springer, Berlin, pp 119–132Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Klippel A, Montello DR (2007) Linguistic and nonlinguistic turn direction concepts. In: Winter S, Duckham M, Kulik L, Kuipers B (eds) Spatial Information theory, 8th International Conference, COSIT 2007, Melbourne, Australia, September 19–23, 2007, vol 4736. LNCS. Springer, Berlin, pp 354–372Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Stewart Hornsby K, King K (2008) Modeling motion relations for moving objects on road networks. GeoInformatica 12(4):477–495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Varzi A (1996) Parts, wholes, and part-whole relations: the prospects of mereotopology. Data Knowl Eng 20(3):259–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Clementini E, Di Felice P (1997) A global framework for qualitative shape description. GeoInformatica 1(1):1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Clementini E, Di Felice P (2000) Spatial operators. ACM SIGMOD Rec 29(3):31–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Billen R, Clementini E (2005) Semantics of collinearity among regions. In: Meersman R, Tari Z, Herrero P (eds) On the move to meaningful internet systems 2005: OTM workshops - 1st Int. Workshop on semantic-based geographical information systems (SeBGIS’05), Agia Napa, Cyprus, October 31 - November 4, 2005, vol 3762. LNCS. Springer, Berlin, pp 1066–1076Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Jackendoff R (1996) The architecture of the linguistic-spatial interface. In: Bloom P, Peterson MA, Nadel L, Garrett MF (eds) Language and space. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachussets, pp 1–30Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kulik L, Klippel A (1999) Reasoning about cardinal directions using grids as qualitative geographic coordinates. In: Freksa C, Mark DM (eds) Spatial Information Theory: Cognitive and Computational Foundations of Geographic Information Science: International Conference COSIT ’99, August 25–29, 1999, Stade, Germany, vol 1661. LNCS. Springer, Berlin, pp 205–220Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Levelt WJM (1996) Perspective taking and ellipsis in spatial descriptions. In: Bloom P, Peterson MA, Nadel L, Garrett MF (eds) Language and space. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachussets, pp 77–107Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    OGC Open Geospatial Consortium Inc (2005) OpenGIS Web Feature Service (WFS) Implementation specification. OGC 04–094:131Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    OGC Open Geospatial Consortium Inc (2007) OpenGIS Geography Markup Language (GML) Encoding Standard. http://www.opengeospatial.org/standards/gml. Accessed 05.12.2008
  38. 38.
    Vivid Solutions Inc (2004) JTS Topology Suite. http://www.vividsolutions.com/jts/JTSHome.htm. Accessed 05.12.2008

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Electrical and Information EngineeringUniversity of L’AquilaL’AquilaItaly

Personalised recommendations