Cities as Visuospatial Networks

Chapter
Part of the Springer Optimization and Its Applications book series (SOIA, volume 125)

Abstract

Current methods used in the study of urban systems are based mostly on economic and transportation demands and ignore human spatial cognition processes, like visual perception, while cognition is an active player in the evolution and dynamics of urban space.

This chapter presents a collection of interdisciplinary studies that link visuospatial cognition to urban dynamics. These are located at the intersection of three rapidly developing scientific, technological, and practical fields: spatial cognition (acquisition and utilization of spatial knowledge), complexity science (graph and network theories), and smart cities (urban planning and design-enhancing digital technologies). We use two complementary methods: (1) Spatial graph-based analysis – Urban environment is represented as a chain of navigational decisions in a form of mathematical graphs (or networks). Then several centrality measures from the graph theory are applied to the constructed graphs to evaluate structural position of urban locations. (2) Computational simulation of the visual search: Pedestrian visual search for urban locations is conceptualized as a stochastic process and modeled by random walk simulation. Results of the simulation are used to quantify visual accessibility of diverse urban settings.

Taken together, suggested methods construct a novel cognitive paradigm in the study of urban systems and urban modeling. The results of the studies present effective tools for exploring various scenarios of urban sustainable design, reshaping infrastructure, mobility, and architecture of our cities.

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank Prof. Daniel Czamanski for his constructive comments and Dr. Michael Natapov for his valuable contribution in development and implementation of the visibility algorithm and the computational simulation.

References

  1. Barabási, A.L., Albert, R.: Emergence of scaling in random networks. Science. 286(5439), 509–512 (1999)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. Batty, M.: Agent-based pedestrian modelling. In: Longley, P.A., Batty, M. (eds.) Advanced Spatial Analysis: the CASA Book of GIS, pp. 81–108. ESRI Press, Redlands (2003)Google Scholar
  3. Batty, M.: A new theory of space syntax. Syntax. 44(0), 36 (2004)Google Scholar
  4. Batty, M.: The new Science of Cities. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA (2013)Google Scholar
  5. Benenson, I.: Multi-agent simulations of residential dynamics in the city. Comput. Environ. Urban. Syst. 22(1), 25–42 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Benenson, I., Hatna, E., Or, E.: From schelling to spatially explicit modeling of urban ethnic and economic residential dynamics. Sociol. Methods Res. 37, 463–497 (2009)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ben-Joseph, E.: The Code of the City: Standards and the Hidden Language of Place Making. MIT Press, Boston (2005)Google Scholar
  8. Blanchard, P., Volchenkov, D.: Intelligibility and first passage times in complex urban networks. Proc. R Soc A Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 464, 2153–2167 (2008)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. Blanchard, P., Volchenkov, D.: Mathematical Analysis of Urban Spatial Networks. Springer, Berlin (2009)MATHGoogle Scholar
  10. Boccignone, G., Ferraro, M.: Modelling gaze shift as a constrained random walk. Physica A. 331, 207–218 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brockmann, D., Geisel, T.: Are Human Scanpaths Levy Flights? Artificial Networks, Conference Publication No. 470, IEE, pp. 263–268. (1999)Google Scholar
  12. De Floriani, L., Marzano, P., Puppo, E.: Line-of-sight communication on terrain models. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Syst. 8, 329–342 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fisher-Gewirtzman, D., Natapov, A.: Different approaches of visibility analyses; applied on a hilly urban environment. Surv. Rev. 46(338), 366–382 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Freeman, L.C.: Centrality in social networks: conceptual clarification. Soc. Networks. 1, 215–239 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hillier, B.: Space is the Machine: A Configurational Theory of Architecture. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1996)Google Scholar
  16. Hillier, B., Hanson, J.: The Social Logic of Space. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hillier, B., Penn, A., Hanson, J., Grajewski, T., Xu, J.: Natural movement: or, configuration and attraction in urban pedestrian movement. Environ. Plann. B Plann. Des. 20, 29–66 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hölscher, C., Meilinger, T., Vrachliotis, G., Brösamle, M., Knauff, M.: Up the down staircase: wayfinding strategies and multi-level buildings. J. Environ. Psychol. 26(4), 284–299 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Huang, A., Levinson, D.: Why retails cluster: an agent model of location choice on supply chains. Environ. Plan. B: Plan. Des. 38(1), 82–94 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jacobs, J.: The Death and Life of Great American Cities, Vintage Books edn. Vintage Books, New York (1961)Google Scholar
  21. Jacobs, A.: Great Streets. MIT Press, Boston (1993)Google Scholar
  22. Jiang, B., Claramunt, C.: Integration of space syntax into GIS: new perspectives for urban morphology. Trans. GIS. 6(3), 295–309 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jiang, B., Jia, T.: Agent-based simulation of human movement shaped by the underlying street structure. Technology. 1, 1–2 (2009)Google Scholar
  24. Krizek, K.J.: Residential relocation and change in urban travel: does neighborhood-scale urban form matter? J. Am. Plan. Assoc. 69(3), 265–279 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Krüger, M.T.J.: An approach to built-form connectivity at an urban scale: system description and its representation. Environ. Plan B: Plan. Des. 6, 67–88 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. McFadden, D.L.: Disaggregate Travel Demand’s RUM Side: a 30-Year Retrospective (Manuscript). Department of Economics, University of California, Berkeley (2000)Google Scholar
  27. Montello, D.: Spatial cognition. In: Smelser, N.J., Baltes, P.B. (eds.) International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2001)Google Scholar
  28. Montello, D., Pick, H.: Integrating knowledge of vertically aligned large-scale spaces. Environ. Behav. 25(4), 457–484 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Natapov, A., Czamanski, D., Fisher-Gewirtzman, D.: Can visibility predict location? Visibility graph of food and drink facilities in the city. Surv. Rev. 45(333), 462–471 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Natapov, A., Czamanski, D., Fisher-Gewirtzman, D.: Visuospatial search in urban environment simulated by random walks. Int. J. Des. Creat. Innov. 4(2), 85–104 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Natapov, A., Fisher-Gewirtzman, D.: Visibility of urban activities and pedestrian routes: an experiment in a virtual environment. Comput. Environ. Urban. Syst. 58, 60–70 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Newmaern, M.E.J.: The structure and function of complex networks. SIAM Rev. 45, 167–256 (2003)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Newman, P., Kenworthy, J.: Sustainability and Cities: Overcoming Automobile Dependence. Island Press, Washing, DC (1999)Google Scholar
  34. Oldenburg R: Great Good Place; Cafés, Coffe Shops, Bookstores, Bars, Hair Salons, and Other Hangouts at the Heart of a Community. Marlow & Company, New York (1989)Google Scholar
  35. O’Neill, M.: Evaluation of a conceptual model of architectural legibility. Environ. Behav. 23(3), 553–574 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Osborn, F., Mumford, L., Whittick, A.: The new Towns: the Answer to Megalopolis. McGraw-Hill, New York (1963)Google Scholar
  37. Pearson, K.: The problem of the random walk. Nature. 72, 294 (1905)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  38. Pendola, R., Gen, S.: Does “main street” promote sense of community? A comparison of San Francisco neighborhoods. Environ. Behav. 40(4), 545–574 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Pushkarev, B., Zupan, J.M.: Urban Space for Pedestrians. MIT, Cambridge (1975)Google Scholar
  40. Rose, J., Ligtenberg, A. L.: Simulating Pedestrians Through the Inner-City: An Agent-Based Approach. Proceedings of the Social Simulation Conference (SSC’14). Barcelona. (2014)Google Scholar
  41. Timmermans, H.J.P., Arenze, T., Joh, C.-H.: Analyzing space-time behavior: new approaches to old problems. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 26(2), 175–190 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Turner, A., Doxa, M., O’Sullivan, D., Pen, A.: From isovists to visibility graphs: a methodology for the analysis of architectural space. Environ. Plan. B: Plan. Des. 28(1), 103–121 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Turner A, Penn A.: Making Isovists Syntactic: Isovist Integration Analysis. Proceedings 2nd International Symposium on Space Syntax, Brasilia (1999)Google Scholar
  44. Volchenkov, D., Blanchard, P.: Random walks along the streets and canals in compact cities: spectral analysis, dynamical modularity, information, and statistical mechanics. Phys. Rev. E. 75(2), 6104–6118 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Weisman, J.: Evaluating architectural legibility: way-finding in the built environment. Environ. Behav. 13(2), 189–204 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wiener, J.M., Franz, G.: Isovists as a means to predict spatial experience and behavior. In: Spati (ed.) Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence Number 3343, pp. 42–57. Springer, Berlin (2005)Google Scholar
  47. Wilson, G.: Complex Spatial Systems: the Modelling Foundations of Urban and Regional Analysis. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (2000)Google Scholar
  48. Zachariadis, V.: An agent-based approach to the simulation of pedestrian movement and factors that control it. CUPUM. 2005, 1–16 (2005)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for Advanced Spatial AnalysisUniversity College LondonLondonUK
  2. 2.Faculty of Architecture & Town PlanningTechnion-IITTechnion city, HaifaIsrael

Personalised recommendations