Using Location-Based Social Media for Ranking Individual Familiarity with Places: A Case Study with Foursquare Check-in Data

  • Wangshu WangEmail author
Part of the Lecture Notes in Geoinformation and Cartography book series (LNGC)


The growing popularity of location aware social media provides a unique opportunity to study individual knowledge of the environment, e.g., individual familiarity with places. With Foursquare being one of the most popular location-based social media, in this paper, we focus on ranking individual familiarity with places using Foursquare check-in data. Our method firstly identifies individually meaningful places. Then, the identified meaningful places are ranked according to individual’s familiarity with them, i.e., the weighting that we assigned to each place based on the information indicated by the tagging activities. Results of the evaluation demonstrate the possibility of ranking individual familiarity with places using location-based social media.


Place identification Location-based social media Spatial cognition 



Wangshu Wang is supported by China Scholarship Council (CSC). Special thanks to Dr. Haosheng Huang and Prof. Georg Gartner for their supervision and useful comments to the draft of the paper.


  1. Ashbrook D, Starner T (2002) Learning significant locations and predicting user movement with GPS. In: Proceedings of the 6th IEEE international symposium on wearable computers, pp 101–108Google Scholar
  2. Äyrämö S, Kärkkäinen T (2006) Introduction to partitioning-based clustering methods with a robust example. Reports of the Department of Mathematics Information Technology, University of Jyväskylä (Series C. Software and Computational Engineering, 1/2006)Google Scholar
  3. Chen WC, Battestini A, Gelfand N, Setlur V (2009) Visual summaries of popular landmarks from community photo collections. In: Proceedings of the 17th ACM international conference on multimedia, ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp 789–792Google Scholar
  4. Cheng Z, Caverlee J, Lee K, Sui D (2011) Exploring millions of footprints in location sharing services. Presented at the proceedings of the fifth international conference on weblogs and social media, The AAAI Press, Barcelona, Catalonia, SpainGoogle Scholar
  5. Cranshaw J et al (2012) The livehoods project: utilizing social media to understand the dynamics of a city. In: Proceeding of 6th international AAAI conference weblogs and social media, AAAI Press, pp 81–88Google Scholar
  6. Dempster A, Laird N, Rubin D (1977) Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the EM algorithm. J Roy Stat Soc 39(1):1–38Google Scholar
  7. Edelsbrunner H, Kirkpatrick D, Seidel R (1983) On the shape of a set of points in the plane. IEEE Trans Inf Theor 29(4):551–559CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ester M et al (1996) A density-based algorithm for discovering clusters in large spatial databases with noise. In: Proceedings of second international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining, pp 226–231Google Scholar
  9. Fraley C, Raftery AE (2002) Model-based clustering, discriminant analysis, and density estimation. J Am Stat Assoc 97:611–631CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Heller KA, Ghahramani Z (2005) Bayesian hierarchical clustering. In: Proceedings of the 22nd international conference on machine learning, pp 297–304Google Scholar
  11. Hays J, Efros A (2008) IM2GPS: estimating geographic information from a single image. In: Presented at the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2008, CVPR 2008, CVPR 2008, pp 1–8Google Scholar
  12. Hollenstein L, Purves RS (2010) Exploring place through user-generated content: using Flickr tags to describe city cores. J Spatial Inf Sci 1:21–48Google Scholar
  13. Kennedy L, Naaman M, Ahern S, Nair R, Rattenbury T (2007) How Flickr helps us make sense of the world: context and content in community-contributed media collections. In: Proceedings of conference on multimedia, ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp 631–640Google Scholar
  14. Keßler C, Maué P, Heuer JT, Bartoschek T (2009) Bottom-up gazetteers: learning from the implicit semantics of geotags. In: Janowicz K, Raubal M, Levashkin S (eds) GeoSpatial semantics. Springer, Berlin, pp 83–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lehman A et al (2005) JMP for basic univariate and multivariate statistics: a step-by-step guide, SAS Press, Cary, NC, pp 123Google Scholar
  16. Lindqvist J et al (2011) I’m the mayor of my house: examining why people use foursquare. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, pp 2409–2418Google Scholar
  17. MacQueen JB (1967) Some methods for classification and analysis of multivariate observations. In: Proceedings of 5th berkeley symposium on mathematical statistics and probability, vol 1, University of California Press, Berkeley, pp 281–297Google Scholar
  18. Marmasse N, Schmandt C (2000) Location-aware information delivery with ComMotion. In: Proceedings of the 2nd international symposium on handheld and ubiquitous computing (HUC), vol 1927, Springer, Berlin, pp 361–370Google Scholar
  19. Mehrabian A, Russell JA (1974) An approach to environmental psychology. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  20. Naaman M, Zhang AX, Brody S, Lotan G (2012) On the study of diurnal urban routines on twitter. In: Presented at the proceedings of the sixth international conference on weblogs and social media, The AAAI Press, Dublin, IrelandGoogle Scholar
  21. Nurmi P (2009) Identifying meaningful places. PhD thesis, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, FinlandGoogle Scholar
  22. Noulas A, Scellato S, Mascolo C, Pontil M (2011) Exploiting semantic annotations for clustering geographic areas and users in location-based social networks. The social mobile web, volume WS-11-02 of AAAI workshops, AAAIGoogle Scholar
  23. Rattenbury T, Naaman M (2009) Methods for extracting place semantics from flickr tags. ACM Trans Web 3(1):1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Reynolds DA (2009) Gaussian mixture models. encyclopedia of biometrics, pp 659–663Google Scholar
  25. Rokach L, Maimon O (2005) Clustering methods. In: Rokach L, Maimon O (eds) Data mining and knowledge discovery handbook, pp 321–352Google Scholar
  26. Shemyakin FN (1962) General problems of orientation in space and space representations. In Anan’yev BG et al (ed) Psychological science in the USSR, vol 1, NTIS Report No. TT6211083 (pp 184–255). Office of Technical Services, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  27. Sibson R (1973) SLINK: an optimally efficient algorithm for the single-link cluster method. Comput J 16(1):30–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Texasoft (2008) Understanding statistical hypothesis testing. URL
  29. Tuan YF (1977) Space and place: the perspective of experience. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, pp 138–184Google Scholar
  30. Zheng Y, Li Y, Zha Z, Chua T (2011) Mining travel patterns from GPS-tagged photos. In: Lee K, Tsai W, Liao H, Chen T, Hsieh J, Tseng C (eds) Advances in multimedia modeling. Springer, Berlin, pp 262–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Zhou C, Frankowski D, Ludford P, Shekhar S, Terveen L (2004) Discovering personal gazetteers: an interactive clustering approach. In: Proceedings of ACMGISGoogle Scholar
  32. Zhou C, Frankowski D, Ludford P, Shekhar S, Terveen L (2007) An experiment in discovering personally meaningful places: an interactive clustering approach. ACM Trans Inf Syst 25(3):12CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Research Group CartographyVienna University of TechnologyViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations