Qualitative Spatial Reasoning in 3D: Spatial Metrics for Topological Connectivity in a Region Connection Calculus

  • Chaman L. Sabharwal
  • Jennifer L. Leopold
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8891)

Abstract

In qualitative spatial reasoning, there are three distinct properties for reasoning about spatial objects: connectivity, size, and direction. Reasoning over combinations of these properties can provide additional useful knowledge. To facilitate end-user spatial querying, it also is important to associate natural language with these relations. Some work has been done in this regard for line-region and region-region topological relations in 2D, and very recent work has initiated the association between natural language, topology, and metrics for 3D objects. However, prior efforts have lacked rigorous analysis, expressive power, and completeness of the associated metrics. Herein we present new metrics to bridge the gap required for integration between topological connectivity and size information for spatial reasoning. The new set of metrics that we present should be useful for a variety of applications dealing with 3D objects.

Keywords

Region Connection Calculus Metrics Spatial Reasoning Qualitative Reasoning 

References

  1. 1.
    Randell, D.A., Cui, Z., Cohn, A.G.: A Spatial Logic Based on Regions and Connection. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, Cambridge, MA, pp. 156–176 (1992)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Egenhofer, M.J., Herring, J.: Categorizing binary topological relations between regions, lines, and points in geographic databases. In NCGIA Technical Reports 91-7 (1991)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Schockaert, S., De Cock, M., Kerre, E.E.: Spatial reasoning in a fuzzy region connection calculus. Artificial Intelligence 173(2), 258–298 (2009)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hernandez, D., Clementini, E.C., Di Felice, P.: Qualitative Distances. In: Kuhn, W., Frank, A.U. (eds.) COSIT 1995. LNCS, vol. 988, pp. 45–57. Springer, Heidelberg (1995)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Shariff, R., Egenhofer, M.J., Mark, D.M.: Natural-Language Spatial Relations Between Linear and Areal Objects: The Topology and Metric of English-Language Terms. International Journal of Geographical Information Science 12, 215–246 (1998)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Schneider, M.: Vague topological predicates for crisp regions through metric refinements. In: Fisher, P.F. (ed.) Developments in Spatial Data Handling, 11th International Symposium on Spatial Data Handling, pp. 149–162. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Leopold, J., Sabharwal, C., Ward, K.: Spatial Relations Between 3D Objects: The Association Between Natural Language, Topology, and Metrics. In: Proceedings of the Twentieth International Conference on Distributed Multimedia Systems, DMS 2014, Pittsburgh, August 27-29, pp. 241–249 (2014)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Albath, J., Leopold, J.L., Sabharwal, C.L., Maglia, A.M.: RCC-3D: Qualitative Spatial Reasoning in 3D. In: Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Computer Applications in Industry and Engineering, pp. 74–79 (2010)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sabharwal, C.L., Leopold, J.L.: Cardinal Direction Relations in Qualitative Spatial Reasoning. International Journal of Computer Science & Information Technology (IJCSIT) 6(1), 1–13 (2014), doi:10.5121/ijcsit.2014.6101CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chaman L. Sabharwal
    • 1
  • Jennifer L. Leopold
    • 1
  1. 1.Missouri University of Science and TechnologyUSA

Personalised recommendations