Comparing Directed and Weighted Road Maps

  • Alyson Bittner
  • Brittany Terese FasyEmail author
  • Maia Grudzien
  • Sayonita Ghosh Hajra
  • Jici Huang
  • Kristine Pelatt
  • Courtney Thatcher
  • Altansuren Tumurbaatar
  • Carola Wenk
Part of the Association for Women in Mathematics Series book series (AWMS, volume 13)


With the increasing availability of GPS trajectory data, map construction algorithms have been developed that automatically construct road maps from this data. In order to assess the quality of such (constructed) road maps, the need for meaningful road map comparison algorithms becomes increasingly important. Indeed, different approaches for map comparison have been recently proposed; however, most of these approaches assume that the road maps are modeled as undirected embedded planar graphs.

In this paper, we study map comparison algorithms for more realistic models of road maps: directed roads as well as weighted roads. In particular, we address two main questions: how close are the graphs to each other, and how close is the information presented by the graphs (i.e., traffic times, trajectories, and road type)? We propose new road network comparisons and give illustrative examples. Furthermore, our approaches do not only apply to road maps but can be used to compare other kinds of graphs as well.



This paper is the product of a working group of WinCompTop 2016, sponsored by NSF DMS 1619908, Microsoft Research, and the Institute for Mathematics and Its Applications (IMA) in Minneapolis, MN. In addition, part of this research was conducted under NSF CCF 618605 (Fasy) and NSF CCF 1618469 (Wenk).


  1. 1.
    M. Ahmed, B.T. Fasy, C. Wenk, Local persistent homology based distance between maps, in Proceedings of 22nd ACM SIGSPATIAL International Conference on Advances in Geographic Information Systems (ACM, New York, 2014), pp. 43–52Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    M. Ahmed, B.T. Fasy, K.S. Hickmann, C. Wenk, Path-based distance for street map comparison. ACM Trans. Spatial Algorithms Syst. 1, article 3, 28 pages (2015)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    M. Ahmed, S. Karagiorgou, D. Pfoser, C. Wenk, A comparison and evaluation of map construction algorithms using vehicle tracking data. GeoInformatica 19(3), 601–632 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    M. Ahmed, S. Karagiorgou, D. Pfoser, C. Wenk, Map Construction Algorithms (Springer, Berlin, 2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    H. Alt, L.J. Guibas, Discrete geometric shapes: matching, interpolation, and approximation - a survey, in Handbook of Computational Geometry, ed. by J.-R. Sack, J. Urrutia (Elsevier, North-Holland, 1999), pp. 121–154Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    P. Bendich, E. Gasparovic, J. Harer, R. Izmailov, L. Ness, Multi-scale local shape analysis for feature selection in machine learning applications, in Proceedings of International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (2015)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    J. Biagioni, J. Eriksson, Inferring road maps from global positioning system traces: survey and comparative evaluation. Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board 2291, 61–71 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    G. Carlsson, Topology and data. Bull. Am. Math. Soc. 46(2), 255–308 (2009)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    F. Chazal, D. Cohen-Steiner, M. Glisse, L.J. Guibas, S.Y. Oudot, Proximity of persistence modules and their diagrams, in Proceedings of 25th Annual Symposium on Computational Geometry (2009), pp. 237–246Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    F. Chazal, V. De Silva, M. Glisse, S. Oudot, The Structure and Stability of Persistence Modules (Springer, Berlin, 2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    O. Cheong, J. Gudmundsson, H.-S. Kim, D. Schymura, F. Stehn, Measuring the similarity of geometric graphs, in Proceedings of International Symposium on Experimental Algorithms (2009), pp. 101–112Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    S. Chowdhury, F. Mémoli, Persistent homology of directed networks, in Proceedings of 50th Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems and Computers (IEEE, New York, 2016), pp. 77–81Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    D. Cohen-Steiner, H. Edelsbrunner, J. Harer, Stability of persistence diagrams, in Proceedings of 21st Annual Symposium on Computational Geometry (2005), pp. 263–271Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    D. Conte, P. Foggia, C. Sansone, M. Vento, Thirty years of graph matching in pattern recognition. Int. J. Pattern Recognit. Artif. Intell. 18(3), 265–298 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    H. Edelsbrunner, J. Harer, Computational Topology: An Introduction (AMS, Providence, 2010)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    D. Eppstein, Subgraph isomorphism in planar graphs and related problems. J. Graph Algorithms Appl. 3(3), 1–27 (1999)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    R. Ghrist, Barcodes: the persistent topology of data. Bull. Am. Math. Soc. 45, 61–75 (2008)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    A. Grigor’yan, Y. Lin, Y. Muranov, S.-T. Yau, Homologies of path complexes and digraphs (2012, Preprint). arXiv:1207.2834Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    A. Hatcher, Algebraic Topology (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2002). Electronic VersionGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    S. Karagiorgou, D. Pfoser, On vehicle tracking data-based road network generation, in Proceedings of 20th ACM SIGSPATIAL International Conference on Advances in Geographic Information Systems (2012), pp. 89–98Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    H. Kashima, K. Tsuda, A. Inokuchi, Kernels for graphs, in Kernel Methods in Computational Biology, ed. by B. Schölkopf, K. Tsuda, J.-P. Vert (MIT Press, Cambridge, 2004), pp. 155–170Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    J. Mondzech, M. Sester, Quality analysis of Openstreetmap data based on application needs. Cartographica 46, 115–125 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    E. Munch, A user’s guide to topological data analysis. J. Learn. Anal. 4(2), 47–61 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    J.R. Munkres, Elements of Algebraic Topology (Addison-Wesley, Redwood City, 1984)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
  26. 26.
    R.C. Read, D.G. Corneil, The graph isomorphism disease. J. Graph Theory 1(4), 339–363 (1977)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    B. Schweinhart, J.K. Mason, R.D. MacPherson, Topological similarity of random cell complexes and applications. Phys. Rev. E 93(6), 062111 (2016)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    K. Turner, Generalizations of the Rips filtration for quasi-metric spaces with persistent homology stability results (2016, Preprint). arXiv:1608.00365Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    S.V.N. Vishwanathan, N.N. Schraudolph, R. Kondor, K.M. Borgwardt, Graph kernels. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 11(Apr), 1201–1242 (2010)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Y. Xu, S.M. Salapaka, C.L. Beck, A distance metric between directed weighted graphs, in 2013 IEEE 52nd Annual Conference on Decision and Control (IEEE, New York, 2013), pp. 6359–6364Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) and the Association for Women in Mathematics 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alyson Bittner
    • 1
  • Brittany Terese Fasy
    • 2
    Email author
  • Maia Grudzien
    • 3
  • Sayonita Ghosh Hajra
    • 4
  • Jici Huang
    • 5
  • Kristine Pelatt
    • 6
  • Courtney Thatcher
    • 7
  • Altansuren Tumurbaatar
    • 8
  • Carola Wenk
    • 9
  1. 1.Department of MathematicsUniversity at Buffalo (SUNY)BuffaloUSA
  2. 2.Gianforte School of Computing and Department of Mathematical SciencesMontana State UniversityBozemanUSA
  3. 3.School of ComputingMontana State UniversityBozemanUSA
  4. 4.Department of MathematicsHamline UniversitySt PaulUSA
  5. 5.Gianforte School of ComputingMontana State UniversityBozemanUSA
  6. 6.Department of MathematicsSt. Catherine UniversitySt PaulUSA
  7. 7.Department of Mathematics and Computer ScienceUniversity of Puget SoundTacomaUSA
  8. 8.Department of Mathematics and StatisticsWashington State UniversityPullmanUSA
  9. 9.Department of Computer ScienceTulane UniversityNew OrleansUSA

Personalised recommendations