Advertisement

An Overall Framework for Personalised Landmark Selection

  • Eva NuhnEmail author
  • Sabine Timpf
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Geoinformation and Cartography book series (LNGC)

Abstract

This paper proposes a multidimensional model for the selection of personalized landmarks. The model is based on an existing landmark salience model, which was designed to be open to adaptations regarding individual user preferences. The conventional model is based solely on landmark dimensions (i.e. visual, semantic and structural dimension). We add an additional personal dimension to account for different familiarities and interests. Further, we add an environmental dimension to accommodate different routing situations and a descriptive dimension to consider the brevity of a landmark description. In this paper we identify the attributes of the dimensions of the multidimensional model and investigate methods for calculating the salience of the attributes. The applicability and usefulness of the (still evolving) model is shown with three different case studies.

References

  1. Balaban CZ, Röser F, Hamburger K (2014) The effect of emotions and emotionally laden landmarks on wayfinding. In: Proceedings of the 36th annual conference of the cognitive science society, pp 1880–1885Google Scholar
  2. Banerjee S, Frey HP, Molholm S, Foxe JJ (2015) Interests shape how adolescents pay attention: the interaction of motivation and top-down attentional processes in biasing sensory activations to anticipated events. Eur J Neurosci 41(6):818–834CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Berry DC, de Rosis F (1991) Designing an adaptive interface for epiaim. In: Mario S, Arie H, Marius F, Jan T (eds) AIME 91, Springer, pp 306–316Google Scholar
  4. Brusilovsky P, Millán E (2007) User models for adaptive hypermedia and adaptive educational systems. In: Peter B, Alfred K, Wolfgang N (eds) The adaptive web. Springer, pp 3–53Google Scholar
  5. Burnett G, Smith D, May A (2001) Supporting the navigation task: characteristics of ’good’ landmarks. In: Hanson MA (ed) Contemporary ergonomics 2001, Taylor & Francis, pp 441–446Google Scholar
  6. Caduff D, Timpf S (2005) The landmark spider: Representing landmark knowledge for wayfinding tasks. In: Barkowsky T, Freksa C, Hegarty M, Lowe R (eds) AAAI spring symposium: reasoning with mental and external diagrams: computational modeling and spatial assistance. AAAI Press, pp 30–35Google Scholar
  7. Caduff D, Timpf S (2008) On the assessment of landmark salience for human navigation. Cog Process 9(4):249–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Duckham M, Winter S, Robinson M (2010) Including landmarks in routing instructions. J Locat Based Serv 4(1):28–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Elias B (2003) Extracting landmarks with data mining methods. In: Kuhn W, Worboys MF, Timpf S (eds) Spatial information theory. COSIT 2003. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 2825. Springer, Berlin, pp 375–389Google Scholar
  10. Elias B, Sester M (2006) Incorporating landmarks with quality measures in routing procedures. In: Raubal M, Miller HJ, Frank A, Goodchild MF (eds) Geographic information science. GIScience 2006. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 4197. Springer, Berlin, pp 65–80Google Scholar
  11. Götze J, Boye J (2016) Learning landmark salience models from users route instructions. J Locat Based Serv 10(1):47–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hamburger K, Röser F (2014) The role of landmark modality and familiarity in human wayfinding. Swiss J Psychol 73(4):205–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Herrmann T, Schweizer K, Janzen G, Katz S (1998) Routen- und überblickswissen - konzeptuelle überlegungen. Kognitionswissenschaft 7(4):145–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hidi S, Renninger KA (2006) The four-phase model of interest development. Educ Psychol 41(2):111–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kattenbeck M (2016) Empirically measuring salience of objects for use in pedestrian navigation. PhD thesis, University of Regensburg, Chair for information scienceGoogle Scholar
  16. Klippel A, Winter S (2005) Structural salience of landmarks for route directions. In: Cohn AG, Mark DM (eds) Spatial information theory. COSIT 2005. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 3693. Springer, Berlin, pp 347–362Google Scholar
  17. Kobsa A, Koenemann J, Pohl W (2001) Personalised hypermedia presentation techniques for improving online customer relationships. Knowl Eng Rev 16(2):111–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Krapp A, Hidi S, Renninger A (2017) Interest, learning and developement. In: Ann R, Suzanne H, Andreas K (eds) The role of interest in learning and development. Psychology Press, pp 3–26Google Scholar
  19. Lovelace KL, Hegarty M, Montello DR (1999) Elements of good route directions in familiar and unfamiliar environments. In: Freksa C, Mark DM (eds) Spatial information theory. COSIT 1999. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 1661. Springer, Berlin, pp 65–82Google Scholar
  20. Lynch K (1960) The image of the city. MIT pressGoogle Scholar
  21. McGillivray S, Murayama K, Castel AD (2015) Thirst for knowledge: the effects of curiosity and interest on memory in younger and older adults. Psychol Aging 30(4):835CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Nothegger C, Winter S, Raubal M (2004) Selection of salient features for route directions. Spat Cogn Comput 4(2):113–136Google Scholar
  23. Nuhn E, Timpf S (2016) A multidimensional model for personalized landmarks. In: International conference on location based services. Austria, Research Group Cartography, Vienna University of Technology, Vienna, pp 4–6Google Scholar
  24. Nuhn E, Timpf S (2017) Personal dimensions of landmarks. In: Bregt A, Sarjakoski T, van Lammeren R, Rip F (eds) Societal Geo-innovation: selected papers of the 20th AGILE conference on geographic information science. Springer International Publishing, pp 129–143Google Scholar
  25. Nuhn E, Reinhardt W, Haske B (2012) Generation of landmarks from 3D city models and osm data. In: Gensel J, Josselin D, Vandenbroucke D (eds) Proceedings of the AGILE 2012 international conference on geographic information science, pp 365–369Google Scholar
  26. Palmiero M, Piccardi L (2017) The role of emotional landmarks on topographical memory. Front Psychol 8:763CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Quesnot T, Roche S (2015) Quantifying the significance of semantic landmarks in familiar and unfamiliar environments. In: Fabrikant SI, Raubal M, Michela B, Davies C, Freundschuh S, Bell S (eds) Spatial information theory. COSIT 2015. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 9368. Springer, pp 468–489Google Scholar
  28. Raubal M, Winter S (2002) Enriching wayfinding instructions with local landmarks. In: Egenhofer MJ, Mark DM (eds) Geographic information science. GIScience 2002. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 2478. Springer, Berlin, pp 243–259Google Scholar
  29. Renniger AK, Su S (2012) Interest and its development. In: Ryan RM (ed) The Oxford handbook of human motivation, OUP USA, pp 167–190Google Scholar
  30. Rensink RA, O’Regan JK, Clark JJ (1997) To see or not to see: the need for attention to perceive changes in scenes. Psychol Sci 8(5):368–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Richter KF (2017) Identifying landmark candidates beyond toy examples. KI 31(2):135–139Google Scholar
  32. Richter KF, Winter S (2014) Landmarks—GIScience for intelligent services. Springer International PublishingGoogle Scholar
  33. Schneider LF, Taylor HA (1999) How do you get there from here? mental representations of route descriptions. Appl Cogn Psychol 13(5):415–441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Siegel AW, White SH (1975) The development of spatial representations of large-scale environments. Adv Child Dev Behav 10:9–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sorrows ME, Hirtle SC (1999) The nature of landmarks for real and electronic spaces. In: Freksa C, Mark DM (eds) Spatial information theory. COSIT 1999. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 1661. Springer, Berlin, pp 37–50Google Scholar
  36. Tenbrink T, Winter S (2009) Variable granularity in route directions. Spat Cogn Comput 9(1):64–93Google Scholar
  37. Thorndyke PW (1980) Spatial cognition and reasoning. In: Harvey JH (ed) Cognition, social behavior, and the environment, Rand Corporation, pp 137–149Google Scholar
  38. Waller D, Loomis JM, Golledge RG, Beall AC (2000) Place learning in humans: the role of distance and direction information. Spat Cogn Comput 2(4):333–354Google Scholar
  39. Winter S (2003) Route adaptive selection of salient features. In: Kuhn W, Worboys MF, Timpf S (eds) Spatial information theory. COSIT 2003. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 2825. Springer, Berlin, pp 349–361Google Scholar
  40. Winter S, Raubal M, Nothegger C (2005) Focalizing measures of salience for wayfinding. In: Meng L, Zipf A, Tumasch R (eds) Map-based mobile services theories, methodsand implementations. Springer, pp 125–139Google Scholar
  41. Winter S, Janowicz K, Richter KF, Vasardani M (2012) Knowledge acquisition about places. SIGSPATIAL Spec 4(3):20–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wolfensberger M, Richter KF (2015) A mobile application for a user-generated collection of landmarks. In: Gensel J, Tomko M (eds) Web and wireless geographical information systems. W2GIS 2015. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 9080. Springer International Publishing, pp 3–19Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Geoinformatics GroupUniversity of AugsburgAugsburgGermany

Personalised recommendations