Advertisement

Focalizing Measures of Salience for Wayfinding

  • Stephan Winter
  • Martin Raubal
  • Clemens Nothegger

Abstract

This chapter reviews a model of measuring the salience of a specific class of spatial features—fagades of buildings—for adaptation to abilities and preferences of user groups of wayfinding services. The model was intentionally designed to be open for such adaptations, and we will report on ways, experiences, and limitations of doing so. We will prove the hypothesis that focalization, i.e., adaptation to different decision situations, can be sufficiently modelled by weights of predetermined salience measures to increase wayfinding success. The long term goal is to identify sets of weights for typical foci of user groups.

Keywords

Visual Quality Spatial Ability Semantic Quality Decision Situation Street Intersection 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Allen, G. L. (1999): “Spatial Abilities, Cognitive Maps, and Wayfinding”. In Wayfinding Behavior, Golledge, R. G., Ed. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1999, pp. 46–80.Google Scholar
  2. Burnett, G. E., Smith, D., and May, A. J. (2001): “Supporting the navigation task: Characteristics of ‘good’ landmarks”. In Contemporary Ergonomics 2001, Hanson, M. A., Ed. London: Taylor & Francis, 2001, pp. 441–446.Google Scholar
  3. Cornell, E. H., Heth, C. D., and Broda, L. S. (1989): “Children’s Wayfinding: Response to instructions to use environmental landmarks”. Developmental Psychology, vol. 25(5), pp. 755–764, 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Deakin, A. (1996): “Landmarks as Navigational Aids on Street Maps”. Cartography and Geographic Information Systems, vol. 23(1), pp. 21–36, 1996.Google Scholar
  5. Denis, M., Pazzaglia, F., Cornoldi, C., and Bertolo, L. (1999): “Spatial Discourse and Navigation: An Analysis of Route Directions in the City of Venice”. Applied Cognitive Psychology, vol. 13), pp. 145–174, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Elias, B. (2003): “Extracting Landmarks with Data Mining Methods”. In Spatial Information Theory, vol. 2825, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Kuhn, W., Worboys, M. F., and Timpf, S., Eds. Berlin: Springer, 2003, pp. 398–412.Google Scholar
  7. Freundschuh, S. M., Mark, D. M., Gopal, S., Gould, M. D., and Couclelis, H. (1990): “Verbal Directions for Wayfinding: Implications for Navigation and Geographic Information and Analysis Systems”. 4th International Symposium on Spatial Data Handling, Brassel, K. and Kishimoto, H., Eds. Zurich: Department of Geography, University of Zurich, 1990, pp. 478–487.Google Scholar
  8. Gärling, T., Lindberg, E., and Mäntylä, T. (1983): “Orientation in buildings: Effects of familiarity, visual access, and orientation aids”. Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 68), pp. 177–186, 1983.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Gibson, J. J. (1979): The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1979.Google Scholar
  10. Lovelace, K. L., Hegarty, M., and Montello, D. R. (1999): “Elements of Good Route Directions in Familiar and Unfamiliar Environments”. In Spatial Information Theory, vol. 1661, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Freksa, C. and Mark, D. M., Eds. Berlin: Springer, 1999, pp. 65–82.Google Scholar
  11. Lynch, K. (1960): The Image of the City. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1960.Google Scholar
  12. Michon, P.-E., and Denis, M. (2001): “When and Why are Visual Landmarks Used in Giving Directions?”. In Spatial Information Theory, vol. 2205, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Montello, D. R., Ed. Berlin: Springer, 2001, pp. 292–305.Google Scholar
  13. Nothegger, C. (2003): “Automatic Selection of Landmarks for Pedestrian Guidance”. Institute for Geoinformation, Vienna University of Technology. 2003.Google Scholar
  14. Nothegger, C., Winter, S., and Raubal, M. (2004): “Selection of Salient Features for Route Directions”. Spatial Cognition and Computation, vol. 4(2), pp. (in print), 2004.Google Scholar
  15. Raubal, M., and Winter, S. (2002): “Enriching Wayfinding Instructions with Local Landmarks”. In Geographic Information Science, vol. 2478, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Egenhofer, M. J. and Mark, D. M., Eds. Berlin: Springer, 2002, pp. 243–259.Google Scholar
  16. Raubal, M. and Worboys, M. (1999): “A Formal Model of the Process of Wayfinding in Built Environments”. In Spatial Information Theory, vol. 1661, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Freksa, C. and Mark, D. M., Eds. Berlin: Springer, 1999, pp. 381–399.Google Scholar
  17. Sorrows, M. E. and Hirtle, S. C. (1999): “The Nature of Landmarks for Real and Electronic Spaces”. In Spatial Information Theory, vol. 1661, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Freksa, C. and Mark, D. M., Eds. Berlin: Springer, 1999, pp. 37–50.Google Scholar
  18. Timpf, S. (2002): “Ontologies of wayfinding: a traveler’s perspective”. Networks and Spatial Economics, vol. 2(1), pp. 9–33, 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Timpf, S., Volta, G. S., Pollock, D. W., Frank, A. U., and Egenhofer, M. J. (1992): “A Conceptual Model of Wayfinding Using Multiple Levels of Abstraction”. In Theories and Methods of Spatio-Temporal Reasoning in Geographic Space, vol. 639, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Frank, A. U., Campari, I., and Formentini, U., Eds. Berlin: Springer, 1992, pp. 348–367.Google Scholar
  20. Tom, A., and Denis, M. (2003): “Referring to Landmark or Street Information in Route Directions: What Difference Does it Make?”. In Spatial Information Theory, vol. 2825, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Kuhn, W., Worboys, M., and Timpf, S., Eds. Berlin: Springer, 2003, pp. 384–397.Google Scholar
  21. Wertheimer, M. (1925): “Über Gestalttheorie”. Philosophische Zeitschrift für Forschung und Aussprache, vol. 1), pp. 39–60, 1925.Google Scholar
  22. Winter, S. (2003): “Route Adaptive Selection of Salient Features”. In Spatial Information Theory, vol. 2825, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Kuhn, W., Worboys, M. F., and Timpf, S., Eds. Berlin: Springer, 2003, pp. 320–334.Google Scholar
  23. Zipf, A. (2003): “Die Relevanz von Geoobjekten in Fokuskarten”. In Angewandte Geographische Informationsverarbeitung XIV, Strobl, J., Blaschke, T., and Griesebner, G., Eds. Heidelberg: Wichmann, 2003, pp. 567–576.Google Scholar
  24. Zipf, A., and Richter, K.-F. (2002): “Using Focus Maps to Ease Map Reading”. Künstliche Intelligenz (4), pp. 35–37, 2002.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stephan Winter
    • 1
  • Martin Raubal
    • 2
  • Clemens Nothegger
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of GeomaticsThe University of MelbourneMelbourne
  2. 2.Institute for GeoinformaticsUniversity of MuensterMuenster
  3. 3.Institute for Geoinformation and CartographyTechnical University ViennaVienna

Personalised recommendations