Advertisement

Identifying Locally- and Globally-Distinctive Urban Place Descriptors from Heterogeneous User-Generated Content

  • R. FeickEmail author
  • C. Robertson
Chapter
Part of the Advances in Geographic Information Science book series (AGIS)

Abstract

Place, which can be seen simply as space with meaning, has long been recognized as an important concept for understanding how individuals perceive, utilize and value their surroundings. There is increasing interest in mining information from geo-referenced user-generated content (UGC) and volunteered geographic information (VGI) to gain new insights into how people describe and delimit urban places such as neighbourhoods and vernacular landmarks and locales. In this paper, we aim to extend recent efforts to explore semantic similarity in these data by examining differences in place descriptors through georeferenced photo tags across multiple scales for selected cities in the USA. We compute measures of tag importance using both a naïve aspatial approach and a method based on spatial relations. We then compare the results of these methods for understanding tag semantics, and reveal to what degree certain characterizations as represented in tag-space are also spatially structured. Tag metrics are computed for multiple fixed resolutions that approximate typical urban place sizes (e.g. city, block, neighbourhood) and a simple extension of a well-known tag-frequency metric is proposed to capture differences in locally distinctive and globally distinctive tags. We present this analysis as an adaptation of traditional text analysis methods with ideas from spatial analysis in order to reveal hidden spatial structure within UGC.

Keywords

GIS Internet/Web Urban Data mining Understanding Scale Method Multiresolution 

References

  1. Aldstadt J, Getis A (2006) Using AMOEBA to create a spatial weights matrix and identify spatial clusters. Geogr Anal 38:327–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baeza-Yates R, Ribeiro-Neto R (1999) Modern information retrieval, vol 463. ACM, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. Blei DM, Ng AY, Jordan MI (2003) Latent dirichlet allocation. J Mach Learn 3:993–1022Google Scholar
  4. Cresswell T (2004) Place. Blackwell, MaldenGoogle Scholar
  5. Feick R, Robertson C (2014) A multi-scale approach to exploring urban places in geotagged photographs. Comput Environ Urban Sys. doi: 10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2013.11.006 Google Scholar
  6. Getis A, Ord JK (1992) The analysis of spatial association by use of distance statistics. Geogr Anal 24:189–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hollenstein L, Purves R (2010) Exploring place through user-generated content: using Flickr tags to describe city cores. J Spat Info Sci 1:21–48Google Scholar
  8. Jankowski P, Andrienko N, Andrienko G, Kisilevich S (2010) Discovering landmark preferences and movement patterns from photo postings. Trans GIS 14:833–852CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Janowicz K, Raubal M, Kuhn W (2011) The semantics of similarity in geographic information retrieval. J Spat Info Sci 2:29–57Google Scholar
  10. Li L, Goodchild MF (2012) Constructing places from spatial footprints. In: Goodchild MF, Pfoser D, Sui D (eds) Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGSPATIAL international workshop on crowdsourced and volunteered geographic information (GEOCROWD’12). ACM, New York, pp 15–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Li L, Goodchild MF, Xu B (2013) Spatial, temporal, and socioeconomic patterns in the use of Twitter and Flickr. Cart Geog Info Sci 40:61–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Mackaness WA, Chaudhry O (2013) Assessing the veracity of methods for extracting place semantics from Flickr tags. Trans GIS 17:544–562CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Manzo LC (2005) For better or worse: exploring multiple dimensions of place meaning. J Environ Psychol 25:67–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Purves R, Edwardes A, Wood J (2011) Describing place through user generated content. First Monday 16 (Sept 5)Google Scholar
  15. Rattenbury T, Naaman M (2009) Methods for extracting place semantics from Flickr tags. ACM Trans Web 3:1–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Shelton T, Poorthuis A, Graham M, Zook M (2014) Mapping the data shadows of hurricane sandy: uncovering the sociospatial dimensions of ‘big data’. Geoforum 52:167–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Salton G, McGill MJ (1983) Introduction to modern information retrieval. McGraw Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of PlanningUniversity of WaterlooWaterlooCanada
  2. 2.Department of Geography and Environmental StudiesWilfrid Laurier UniversityWaterlooCanada

Personalised recommendations