Evaluation in Generalisation

  • Jantien StoterEmail author
  • Xiang Zhang
  • Hanna Stigmar
  • Lars Harrie
Part of the Lecture Notes in Geoinformation and Cartography book series (LNGC)


This chapter presents the context, the issues and the research associated with the evaluation of map generalisation output as well as of map readability. Two main approaches of evaluation are described, i.e. visual and quantitative evaluation. Visual evaluation is subjective, qualitative, and time-consuming, while it is argued that quantitative evaluation is only appropriate for assessing specific aspects. Since automated evaluation is becoming very important in the field of automated generalisation, this chapter further explores the topic of automated evaluation. The previous frameworks for automated generalisation are reviewed and the three main components of automated evaluation are explained. Related to automated evaluation of generalisation output are formulas to automatically evaluate map readability. These are also discussed. This chapter ends with three case studies. The first Case study identifies and evaluates generalised building patterns. It demonstrates the three-step approach of data enrichment, data matching and constraint evaluation. The second Case study deals with formulas to automatically evaluate map readability and the third Case study carries out a comprehensive evaluation demonstrating the main aspects described in this chapter. Both visual and quantitative evaluation are applied of which the last one includes the three main components of automated evaluation. The chapter closes with conclusions and highlights research issues in evaluation.


Hausdorff Distance Generalisation Process Scale Transition Automate Evaluation Target Dataset 
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.



Many people contributed to this chapter. We would like to thank all of them, specifically the EuroSDR project team.

This chapter is written with the support of the Dutch Technology Foundation STW, which is part of the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO), and which is partly funded by the Ministry of Economic Affairs (project code: 11300).


  1. AGENT (1998) Constraint analysis. Technical Report A2, Agent Consortium. Available via
  2. AGENT (1999) Selection of basic measures. Technical Report C1, Agent Consortium. Available via
  3. Ai T, van Oosterom P (2001) Spatial relation abstract in map generalisation process. In: Aref W (ed) Proceedings of the 9th ACM international symposium on advances in geographic information systems (ACM-GIS 2001), AtlantaGoogle Scholar
  4. Ai T, Guo R, Liu Y (2000) A binary tree representation of bend hierarchical structure based on gestalt principles. In: Proceedings of the 9th international symposium on spatial data handling, Beijing, pp 230–243Google Scholar
  5. Ai T, Shuai Y, Li J (2008) The shape cognition and query supported by Fourier transform. In: Headway in Spatial Data Handling (SDH'08), Springer, Montpellier, pp 39–54Google Scholar
  6. Anders KH (2003) A hierarchical graph-clustering approach to find groups of objects. In: The 5th workshop on progress in automated map generalisation, Paris, 2003. Available via
  7. Anders KH (2006) Grid typification. In: Progress in spatial data handling, pp 633–642Google Scholar
  8. Barber C, Cromley R, Andrle R (1995) Evaluating alternative line simplification strategies for multiple representations of cartographic lines. Cartography Geogr Inf Sci 22(4):276–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bard S (2004a) Quality assessment of cartographic generalisation. Trans GIS 8:63–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bard S (2004b) Méthode d’évaluation de la qualité de données géographiques généralisées: Application aux données urbaines. PhD thesis, Université de ParisGoogle Scholar
  11. Bard S, Ruas A (2004) Why and how evaluating generalised data? In: Developments in spatial data handling (SDH’ 04), Springer, Leicester, pp 327–342Google Scholar
  12. Bernier E, Bédard Y (2007) A data warehouse strategy for on-demand multiscale mapping. In: Mackaness WA, Ruas A, Sarjakoski LT (eds) Generalisation of geographic information: cartographic modelling and applications. Elsevier, The Netherlands, pp 177–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bjørke JT (1996) Framework for entropy-based map evaluation. Cartography Geogr Inf Sci 23(2):78–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bjørke, JT (1997) Map generalisation: information theoretic approach to feature elimination. In: Proceedings of the 18th international cartographic conference (ICC’97), vol 1. Swedish Cartographic Society, Stockholm, 1997Google Scholar
  15. Bjørke JT (2003) Generalisation of road networks for mobile map services: an information theoretic approach. In: Proceedings international cartographic conference (ICA), Durban, 2003Google Scholar
  16. Bobzien M, Burghardt D, Petzold I, Neun M, Weibel R (2008) Multi-representation databases with explicitly modeled horizontal, vertical, and update relations. Cartography Geogr Inf Sci 35(1):3–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Brazile F (2000) Semantic infrastructure and methods to support quality evaluation in cartographic generalisation. PhD thesis, Department of Geography, University of ZurichGoogle Scholar
  18. Brewer CA, Stanislawski LV, Buttenfield BP, Sparks KA, McGilloway J, Howard MA (2013) Automated thinning of road networks and road labels for multiscale design of the national map of the United States. Cartography Geogr Inf Sci (in press)Google Scholar
  19. Burghardt D, Schmid S (2010) Constraint-based evaluation of automated and manual generalised topographic maps. In: Gartner G, Ortag F (eds) Cartography in central and eastern Europe. Lecture Notes in Geoinformation and Cartography, Springer, pp 147–162Google Scholar
  20. Burghardt D, Schmid S, Stoter J (2007) Investigations on cartographic constraint formalization. In: Proceedings of the 11th ICA workshop on generalisation and multiple representation, Moscow, Russia, 2007Google Scholar
  21. Burghardt D, Schmid S, Duchêne C, Stoter J, Baella B, Regnauld N, Touya G (2008) Methodologies for the evaluation of generalised data derived with commercial available generalisation systems. In: Proceedings of the 12th ICA workshop on generalisation and multiple representation, jointly organised with EuroSDR commission on data specifications and the Dutch program RGI, Montpellier, France, 2008Google Scholar
  22. Buttenfield BP (1991) A rule for describing line feature geometry. In: Buttenfield BP, McMaster RB (eds) Map generalisation: making rules for knowledge representation. Longman, London, pp 150–170Google Scholar
  23. Buttenfield BP, Stanislawski LV, Brewer CA (2010) Multiscale representations of water: tailoring generalisation sequences to specific physiographic regimes. GIScience short paper proceedings. Available via
  24. Buttenfield BP, Stanislawski LV, Brewer CA (2011) Adapting generalisation tools to physiographic diversity for the United States National hydrography dataset. Cartography Geogr Inf Syst 38(3):289–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Carpenter GA, Gaddam CS (2009) Biased ART: a neural architecture that shifts attention toward previously disregarded features following an incorrect prediction. Technical report CAS/CNS TR-2009-003Google Scholar
  26. Chomsky N (1957) Syntactic structures. Mouton, ParisGoogle Scholar
  27. Christophe S, Ruas A (2002) Detecting building alignments for generalisation purposes. In: Richardson DE, van Oosterom P (eds) Advances in spatial data handling (SDH 2002). Springer, Ottawa, pp 342–419Google Scholar
  28. Dettori G, Puppo E (1996) How generalisation interacts with the topological and geometric structure of maps. In: Kraak MJ, Molenaar M (eds) Advances in GIS research II (SDH96). Taylor and Francis, Delft, pp 559–570Google Scholar
  29. Devogele T, Trevisan J, Raynal L (1996) Building a multi-scale database with scale transition relationships. In: Kraak MJ, Molenaar M (eds) Advances in GIS Research II (SDH’96). Taylor and Francis, United Kingdom, pp 337–351Google Scholar
  30. Edwardes A, Mackaness WA (1999) Modelling knowledge for automated generalisation of categorical maps: a constraint based approach. In: Atkinson P, Martin D (eds) GIS and geocomputation (innovations in GIS 7). Taylor and Francis, London, pp 161–173Google Scholar
  31. Ehrliholzer R (1995) Quality assessment in generalisation: integrating quantitative and qualitative methods. In: Proceedings of the 17th international cartographic conference, Barcelona, 1995Google Scholar
  32. Eley MG (1987) Color-layering and the performance of the topographic map user. Ergonomics 30:655–663CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Fairbairn D (2006) Measuring map complexity. Cartographic J 43(3):224–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Frank AU, Timpf S (1994) Multiple representations for cartographic objects in a multi-scale tree: an intelligent graphical zoom. Comput Graph 18(6):823–829CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Galanda M (2003) Modelling constraints for polygon generalisation. In: Proceedings of the 7th ICA workshop on progress in automated map generalization, Paris, France, 2003Google Scholar
  36. Galanda M, Weibel R (2002) An agent-based framework for polygonal subdivision generalisation. In: Richardson D, van Oosterom P (eds) Advances in spatial data handling (SDH 2002). Springer, Ottawa, pp 121–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hangouët JF (1998) Voronoi diagrams on segments: properties and tractability for generalisation purposes. Technical report for AGENT, Cogit, IGNGoogle Scholar
  38. Harrie L (2001) An optimisation approach to cartographic generalisation. PhD thesis, Lund Institute of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  39. Harrie L, Sarjakoski T (2002) Simultaneous graphic generalisation of vector data sets. GeoInformatica 6(3):233–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Harrie L, Weibel R (2007) Modelling the overall process of generalisation. In: Mackaness WA, Ruas A, Sarjakoski L (eds) Generalisation of geographic information: cartographic modelling and applications. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 67–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Harrie L (1999) The constraint method for solving spatial conflicts in cartographic generalisation. Cartography Geogr Inf Sci 26(1):55–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Harrie L, Stigmar H (2009) An evaluation of measures for quantifying map information. ISPRS J Photogrammetry Remote Sens 65(3):266–274. doi: 10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2009.05.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Heinzle F, Anders KH, Sester M (2005) Graph based approach for recognition of patterns and implicit information in road networks. In: Proceedings of 22nd international cartographic conference (ICC2005), La Coruna, 2005Google Scholar
  44. Heinzle F, Anders KH, Sester M (2006) Pattern recognition in road networks on the example of circular road detection. In: Raubal M, Miller HJ, Frank AU, Goodchild MF (eds) Geographic, information science, vol 4197. Lecture notes in computer science, pp 153–167Google Scholar
  45. Heinzle F, Anders KH, Sester M (2007) Automatic detection of pattern in road networks: methods and evaluation. In: Proceedings of joint workshop visualization and exploration of geospatial data (IAPRS), vol XXXVI—4/W45Google Scholar
  46. João EM (1998) Causes and consequences of map generalisation. Taylor and Francis, LondonGoogle Scholar
  47. Jiang B, Claramunt C (2004) A structural approach to the model generalisation of an urban streets network. GeoInformatica 8(2):157–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Kazemi S, Lim S, Ge L (2005) Integration of cartographic knowledge with generalisation algorithms. In: Proceedings of IGARSS’05, vol 5, pp 3502–3505Google Scholar
  49. Kim DH, Yun ID, Lee SU (2004) A new attributed relational graph matching algorithm using the nested structure of earth mover’s distance. In: Proceedings of 17th international conference on pattern recognition (ICPR’04)Google Scholar
  50. Li Z, Huang P (2002) Quantitative measures for spatial information of maps. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 16(7):699–709CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Li Z, Zhou Q (2012) Integration of linear and areal hierarchies for continuous multi-scale representation of road networks. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 26(5):855–880CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. MacEachren AM (1982) Map complexity: comparison and measurement. Am Cartographer 9:31–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Mackaness WA (1991) Integration and evaluation of map generalisation. In: Buttenfield BP, McMaster RB (eds) Map generalisation: making rules for knowledge representation. Longman, London, pp 217–226Google Scholar
  54. Mackaness WA (1995) Analysis of urban road networks to support cartographic generalisation. Cartography Geogr Inf Sci 22:306–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Mackaness WA, Mackechnie GA (1999) Automating the detection and simplification of junctions in road networks. GeoInformatica 3:185–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Mackaness WA, Edwards G (2002) The importance of modelling pattern and structure in automated map generalisation. In: Joint workshop on multi-scale representations of spatial data, Ottawa, p 11Google Scholar
  57. Mackaness WA, Ruas A (2007) Evaluation in the map generalisation process. In: Mackaness WA, Ruas A, Sarjakoski LT (eds) Generalisation of geographic information: cartographic modelling and applications., Series of international cartographic associationElsevier Science, Amsterdam, pp 89–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Mao B, Harrie L, Ban Y (2012) Detection and typification of linear structures for dynamic visualization of 3D city models. Comput, Environ Urban Syst 36(3):233–244. ISSN 0198-9715.
  59. McMaster RB (1983) Mathematical measures for the evaluation of simplified lines on maps. PhD thesis, Universite du Kansas, Etats-UnisGoogle Scholar
  60. McMaster RB (1987) Automated line generalisation. Cartographica 2(24):74–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. McMaster RB, Shea KS (1992) Generalisation in digital cartography. Resource publications in geography. Association of American GeographersGoogle Scholar
  62. Muller JC (1991) Generalisation of spatial data bases. In: Maguire DJ, Goodchild MF, Rhind DW (eds) Geographical information systems: principles and applications. Longman, London, pp 457–475Google Scholar
  63. Müller JC, Weibel R, Lagrange JP, Salgé F (1995) Generalisation: state of the art and issues. In: Müller JC, Lagrange JP, Weibel R (eds) GIS and generalisation: methodology and practice. Taylor and Francis, United Kingdom, pp 3–17Google Scholar
  64. Mustiere S, Devogele T (2008) Matching networks with different levels of detail. Geoinformatica 12(4):435–453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Neumann J (1994) The topographical information content of a map/an attempt at a rehabilitation of information theory in cartography. Cartographica 31(1):26–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Neun M (2007) Data enrichment for adaptive map generalisation using web services. PhD thesis, Department of Geography, University of ZurichGoogle Scholar
  67. Neun M, Steiniger S (2005) Modelling cartographic relations for categorical maps. In: Proceedings of XXII international cartographic conferenceGoogle Scholar
  68. Oliva A, Mack ML, Shrestha M, Peeper A (2004) Identifying the perceptual dimensions of visual complexity of scenes. In: Proceedings of the 26th annual meeting of the cognitive science societyGoogle Scholar
  69. Peter B (2001) Measures for the generalisation of polygonal maps with categorical data. In: 4th ICA workshop on progress in automated map generalisation, BeijingGoogle Scholar
  70. Phillips RJ, Noyes L (1982) An investigation of visual clutter in the topographic base of a geological map. Cartographic J 19(2):122–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Plazanet C, Bigolin NM, Ruas A (1998) Experiments with learning techniques for spatial model enrichment and line generalisation. GeoInformatica 2(4):315–333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Raposo PJ, Brewer CA (2011) Comparison of topographic map designs for overlay on orthoimage backgrounds. In: Proceedings of ICC, Paris, 2011Google Scholar
  73. Regnauld N (1996) Recognition of building clusters for generalisation. In: Kraak MJ, Molenaar M (eds) Advances in GIS research II (SDH’96). Taylor and Francis, Delft, pp 4B.1–4B.14Google Scholar
  74. Regnauld N (1998) Généralisation du bâti: Structure spatiale de type graphe et representation Cartographique. PhD thesis, Université de Provence, Aix-MarseilleGoogle Scholar
  75. Regnauld N (2001) Contextual building typification in automated map generalization. Algorithmica 30(2):312–333Google Scholar
  76. Rosenholtz R, Li Y, Mansfield J, Jin Z (2005) Feature congestion: a measure of display clutter. In: Proceedings of SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systemsGoogle Scholar
  77. Rosenholtz R, Li Y, Nakano L (2007) Measuring visual clutter. J Vis 7(2):1–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Ruas A (2001) Automatic generalisation research: learning process from interactive generalisation. Technical report 39, OEEPEGoogle Scholar
  79. Ruas A, Plazanet C (1995) Data and knowledge modelling for generalisation. In: Müller JC, Lagrange JP, Weibel R (eds) GIS and generalisation: methodology and practice. Taylor and Francis, United Kingdom, pp 73–90Google Scholar
  80. Ruas A, Plazanet C (1996) Strategies for automated generalisation. In: Kraak JM, Molenaar M (eds) Advances in GIS research II (SDH’96). Taylor and Francis, United Kingdom, pp 319–336Google Scholar
  81. Schmid S (2008) Automated constraint-based evaluation of cartographic generalization solutions. Master’s thesis, Department of Geography, University of ZurichGoogle Scholar
  82. Sester M (2005) Optimization approaches for generalisation and data abstraction. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 19(8):871–897CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Skopelity A, Lysandros T (2001) A methodology for the assessment of generalization quality. In: Proceedings of the 5th ICA workshop on progress in automated map generalization. Beijing, China, 2001Google Scholar
  84. Skopelity A, Tsoulos L (2000) Developing a model for quality assessment of linear features. In: Proceedings of the 4th international symposium on spatial accuracy assessment in national resources and environmental sciences, 2000Google Scholar
  85. Spiess E (1995) The need for generalisation in a GIS environment. In: Müller JC, Lagrange J-P, Weibel R (eds) GIS and generalisation, Gisdata 1. Taylor and Francis, United Kingdom, pp 31–46Google Scholar
  86. Stanislawski LV, Buttenfield BP, Brewer CA, Anderson-Tarver C (2013) Integration metrics for cartographic generalisation: assessment of 1:1,000,000-Scale hydrography and Terrain. In: 26th international cartographic conference, Dresden, 25–30 Aug 2013Google Scholar
  87. Stanislawski LV, Buttenfield BP and Samaranayake VA (2010) Generalisation of hydrographic features and automated metric assessment through bootstrapping. In: Proceedings of the 13th ICA workshop on generalisation and multiple representation, Zürich, Switzerland, 2010Google Scholar
  88. Stanislawski LV, Buttenfield BP (2011) Hydrographic generalisation tailored to dry mountainous regions. Cartography Geogr Inf Syst 38(2):117–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Stanislawski LV, Doumbouya AT, Miller-Corbett CD, Buttenfield BP, Arundel ST (2012) Scaling stream densities for hydrologic generalisation. In: 7th international conference on geographic information science, ColumbusGoogle Scholar
  90. Stanislawski LV (2009) Feature pruning by upstream drainage area to support automated generalisation of the United States national hydrography dataset. Comput, Environ Urban Syst 33:325–333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Steiniger S (2007) Enabling pattern-aware automated map generalisation. PhD thesis, Department of Geography, University of ZurichGoogle Scholar
  92. Stigmar H, Harrie L (2011) Evaluation of analytical methods to describe map readability. Cartographic J 48(1):41–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Stigmar H, Harrie L, Djordjevic M (2013) Analytical estimation of map legibility. SubmittedGoogle Scholar
  94. Stoter JE (2010) State-of-the-art of automated generalisation in commercial software. Number 58. Official publication—EuroSDR 2010. Available via
  95. Stoter JE, Burghardt D, Duchêne C, Baella B, Bakker N, Blok C, Pla M, Regnauld N, Touya G, Schmid S (2009a) Methodology for evaluating automated map generalisation in commercial software. Comput, Environ Urban Syst 33(5):311–324Google Scholar
  96. Stoter JE, van Smaalen J, Bakker N, Hardy P (2009b) Specifying map requirements for automated generalisation of topographic data. Cartographic J 46(3):214–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Topfer F, Pillewizer W (1966) The principles of selection. Cartographic J 3(1):10–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Touya G (2012) Social welfare to assess the global legibility of a generalized map. In: Proceedings of GIScience 2012, Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  99. Tso B, Mather PM (2009) Classification methods for remotely sensed data, 2nd edn. CRC Press, United StatesCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Tversky A (1977) Features of similarity. Psychol Rev 84(4):327–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Van der Poorten P, Jones C (2002) Characterisation and generalisation of cartographic lines using Delaunay triangulation. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 16(8):773–794CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Vapnik (1979) Estimation of dependences based on empirical data. Nauka, Moscow (in Russian)Google Scholar
  103. Veltkamp RC, Hagedoorn M (1999) State-of-the-art in shape matching. Technical report, Department of Information and Computing Sciences, Utrecht UniversityGoogle Scholar
  104. Wang Z, Müller JC (1998) Line generalisation based on analysis of shape characteristics. Cartography and geographic information science 25(1):3–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Weibel R (1991) Amplified intelligence and rule-based systems. In: Buttenfield BP, McMaster RB (eds) Map generalisation: making rules for knowledge representation. Longman, London, pp 172–186Google Scholar
  106. Weibel R (1995) Three essential building blocks for automated generalisation. In: GIS and generalisation: methodology and practice, vol 1 of Gisdata. Taylor and Francis, London, pp 56–69Google Scholar
  107. Weibel R, Dutton G (1998) Constraint-based automated map generalisation. In: Poiker TK, Chrisman N (eds) Proceedings 8th international symposium on spatial data handling, IGU: Geographic Information Science Study Group, Vancouver, pp 214–224Google Scholar
  108. Weibel R, Dutton G (1999) Generalising spatial data and dealing with multiple representations. In: Longley PA, Goodchild MF, Maquire DJ, Rhind DW (eds) Geographical information systems: principles, techniques, management and applications, geoinformation international, 2nd edn. Cambridge, pp 125–155Google Scholar
  109. Wentz E (1997) Shape analysis in GIS. In: Proceedings of AUTO-CARTO 13Google Scholar
  110. Willett P (1998) Chemical similarity searching. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 38(6):983–996CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Wolfe JM (1994) Guided search 2.0: a revised model of visual search. Psychon Bull Rev 1(2):202–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. Woodruff A, Landay J, Stonebraker M (1998) Constant information density in zoomable interfaces. In: Proceedings of advanced visual interfaces’98Google Scholar
  113. Zahn CT (1971) Graph-theoretical methods for detecting and describing gestalt clusters. IEEE Trans Comput C-20(1):68–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Zhang M, Meng L (2007) An iterative road-matching approach for the integration of postal data. Comput Environ Urban Syst 31:597–615CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Zhang X (2012) Automated evaluation of generalised topographic maps. PhD dissertation, ITC, University of Twente. Available via
  116. Zhang X, Tinghua A, Stoter J (2012) Characterization and detection of building patterns in cartographic data: Two algorithms. In: Advances in spatial data handling and GIS. Lecture notes in geoinformation and cartography, Springer, pp 93–107Google Scholar
  117. Zhang X, Tinghua A, Stoter J, Kraak MJ, Molenaar M (2013a) Building pattern recognition in topographic data: examples on collinear and curvilinear alignments. GeoInformatica 17:1–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. Zhang X, Stoter J, Tinghua A, Kraak MJ, Molenaar M (2013b) Automated evaluation of building alignments in generalised maps. Int J Geogr Inf Sci. doi: 10.1080/13658816.2012.758264 Google Scholar
  119. Zhang X, Tinghua A, Stoter J (2008) The evaluation of spatial distribution density in map generalisation. Int Arch Photogrammetry, Remote Sens Spat Inf Sci 37:181–188Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jantien Stoter
    • 1
    Email author
  • Xiang Zhang
    • 2
  • Hanna Stigmar
    • 3
  • Lars Harrie
    • 3
  1. 1.Delft University of Technology and KadasterDelftThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Wuhan UniversityWuhanChina
  3. 3.GIS CentreLund UniversityLundSweden

Personalised recommendations