Visualizing spatial interaction characteristics with direction-based pattern maps
In the era of big data, large amounts of detailed spatial interaction data are readily available due to the increasing pervasiveness of location-aware devices and techniques. Such data are often applied in the research of spatial structures, land use characteristics, and human activity regularities. However, visualizing such data on maps is a great challenge. Existing approaches either encounter overlapping and intersection problems, which may cause information loss or distortion, or are unable to present interaction characteristics. Consequently, the functional and positional features of places and human mobility trends are not fully demonstrated. We propose direction-based pattern maps, a new visualization method to display the spatial interaction pattern of every place by aggregating spatial interaction data in cardinal directions. This approach can well represent local interaction characteristics and is applicable to different spatial scales. Owing to regular hexagonal tessellations, it can avoid cluttering problems and maintain a geographical context. A case study using Beijing taxi trip data is conducted to validate the usefulness of our approach.
KeywordsSpatial interaction Geovisualization Data abstraction Spatial pattern
This research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 41830645, 41625003, and 41771425), the National Key R&D Program of China (Grant No. 2017YFB0503602), and the Open Funding Project of State Key Laboratory of Virtual Reality Technology and Systems (Grant No. 011177220010020).
- Carr DB, Olsen AR, White D (1992) Hexagon mosaic maps for display of univariate and bivariate geographical data. Cartogr Geogr Inf Syst 19(4):228–236Google Scholar
- Chen S, Chen S, Wang Z, Liang J, Yuan X, Cao N, Wu Y (2016). D-Map: visual analysis of ego-centric information diffusion patterns in social media. In: Proceedings of IEEE conference on visual analytics science and technology (VAST’16), pp 41–50Google Scholar
- Dent BD, Torguson JS, Hodler TW (1999) Cartography: thematic map design, 5th edn. WCB/McGraw-Hill, BostonGoogle Scholar
- Fotheringham AS (1981) Spatial structure and distance-decay parameters. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 71(3):425–436Google Scholar
- Fotheringham AS, O’Kelly ME (1989) Spatial interaction models: formulations and applications. Kluwer Academic Publishers, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
- Jenks GF (1967) The data model concept in statistical mapping. Int Yearb Cartogr 7:186–190Google Scholar
- Kamgar-Parsi B, Sander WA (1989) Quantization error in spatial sampling: comparison between square and hexagonal pixels. In: Proceedings of IEEE computer society conference on computer vision and pattern recognition 1989 (CVPR ‘89), pp 604–611Google Scholar
- Lam H, Bertini E, Isenberg P, Plaisant C, Carpendale S (2011). Seven guiding scenarios for information visualization evaluation. Technical Report, University of Calgary. http://innovis.cpsc.ucalgary.ca/innovis/uploads/Publications/Publications/Lam_2011_SGS.pdf
- Taylor PJ (1975) Distance decay in spatial interactions. In: Openshaw S (ed) Concepts and techniques in modern geography. Geo Books, Norwick, pp 3–35Google Scholar
- Trumbo BE (1981) A theory for coloring bivariate statistical maps. Am Stat 35(4):220–226Google Scholar
- Wattenberg M (2002) Arc diagrams: visualizing structure in strings. In: Proceedings of the IEEE symposium on information visualization 2002 (INFOVIS 2002), pp 110–116Google Scholar
- Wüthrich CA, Stucki P (1991) An algorithmic comparison between square-and hexagonal-based grids. CVGIP: Graph Models Image Process 53(4):324–339Google Scholar