Reasoning Mechanism for Cardinal Direction Relations

  • Ah-Lian Kor
  • Brandon Bennett
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6304)


In the classical Projection-based Model for cardinal directions [6], a two-dimensional Euclidean space relative to an arbitrary single-piece region, a, is partitioned into the following nine tiles: North-West, NW(a); North, N(a); North-East, NE(a); West, W(a); Neutral Zone, O(a);East, E(a); South-West, SW(a); South, S(a); and South-East,SE(a). In our Horizontal and Vertical Constraints Model [9], [10] these cardinal directions are decomposed into sets corresponding to horizontal and vertical constraints. Composition is computed for these sets instead of the typical individual cardinal directions. In this paper, we define several whole and part direction relations followed by showing how to compose such relations using a formula introduced in our previous paper [10]. In order to develop a more versatile reasoning system for direction relations, we shall integrate mereology, topology, cardinal directions and include their negations as well.


Cardinal directions composition table mereology topology qualitative spatial reasoning vertical and horizontal constraints model 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Cicerone, S., Di Felice, P.: Cardinal Directions between Spatial Objects: The Pairwise consistency Problem. Information Sciences – Informatics and Computer Science: An International Journal 164(1-4), 165–188 (2004)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Clementini, E., Di Felice, P., Hernandez: Qualitative Representation and Positional Information. Artificial Intelligence 95, 315–356 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cohn, A.G., Bennett, B., Gooday, J., Gotts, N.M.: Qualitative Spatial Representation and Reasoning with the Region Connection Calculus (1997)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Egenhofer, M.J., Sharma, J.: Assessing the Consistency of Complete and Incomplete Topological Information. Geographical Systems 1(1), 47–68 (1993)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Escrig, M.T., Toledo, F.: A framework based on CLP extended with CHRS for reasoning with qualitative orientation and positional information. JVLC 9, 81–101 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Frank, A.: Qualitative Spatial Reasoning with Cardinal Directions. JVLC (3), 343–371 (1992)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Freksa, C.: Using orientation information for qualitative spatial reasoning. In: Proceedings of International Conference GIS – From Space to Territory, Theories and Methods of Spatio-Temporal Reasoning in Geographic Space, pp. 162–178 (1992)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Goyal, R., Egenhofer, M.: Consistent Queries over Cardinal Directions across Different Levels of Detail. In: 11th International Workshop on Database and Expert Systems Applications, Greenwich, UK (2000)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kor, A.L., Bennett, B.: Composition for cardinal directions by decomposing horizontal and vertical constraints. In: Proceedings of AAAI 2003 Spring Symposium on Spatial and Temporal Reasoning (2003a)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kor, A.L., Bennett, B.: An expressive hybrid Model for the composition of cardinal directions. In: Proceedings of IJCAI 2003 Workshop on Spatial and Temporal Reasoning, Acapulco, Mexico, August 8-15 (2003b)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ligozat, G.: Reasoning about Cardinal Directions. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing 9, 23–44 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mackworth, A.: Consistency in Networks of Relations. Artificial Intelligence 8, 99–118 (1977)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Papadias, D., Theodoridis, Y.: Spatial relations, minimum bounding rectangles, and spatial data structures. Technical Report KDBSLAB-TR-94-04 (1997)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sharma, J., Flewelling, D.: Inferences from combined knowledge about topology and directions. In: Advances in Spatial Databases, 4th International Symposium, Portland, Maine, pp. 271–291 (1995)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Skiadopoulos, S., Koubarakis, M.: Composing Cardinal Direction Relations. Artificial Intelligence 152(2), 143–171 (2004)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Varzi, A.C.: Parts, Wholes, and Part-Whole Relations: The prospects of Mereotopology. Data and Knowledge Engineering 20, 259–286 (1996)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ah-Lian Kor
    • 1
  • Brandon Bennett
    • 2
  1. 1.Arts Environment and Technology FacultyLeeds Metropolitan UniversityLeedsUK
  2. 2.School of ComputingLeeds UniversityLeedsUK

Personalised recommendations