A Two-Phase Multiobjective Local Search for GIS Information Fusion: Spatial Homogeneity and Semantic Information Tradeoff

Part of the Lecture Notes in Geoinformation and Cartography book series (LNGC)


This chapter deals with information simplification after the union of several information layers within a geographic information system (GIS). The challenge is to have better visualization (spatial homogeneity) while keeping as much information as possible (semantic information). These two objectives are opposing. Each layer has a set of concepts attached to an ontology, allowing the computation of a semantic distance used to select the information. Each object (called an instance) in a layer is annotated with the concept of the layer and also with its spatial information (shape, localization, etc.). The proposed approach uses a two-phase multiobjective local search in an ascendant way starting from the most complete set of concepts or in a descendant way starting from the most simplified set of concepts. In this chapter, we use this technique for environmental applications in order to determine ecological units based on environmental and topological layers. These units are used to identify isolated or threatened ecosystems in tropical forests. We compare the quality of the results and the computation time with other approaches, such as genetic algorithms.


GIS Optimization Multiobjective Semantic information Ontology Map visualization 


  1. Deb K, Pratap A, Agarwal S, Meyarivan T (2002) A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: Nsga-ii. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 6:182–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Fonseca FT, Egenhofer MJ (1999) Ontology-driven geographic information systems. In: Proceedings of the 7th ACM international symposium on advances in geographic information systems, ser. GIS’99. New York, ACM, pp 14–19, [Online]. Available: Retrieved Nov 2011
  3. Jadaan OA, Rajamani L, Rao CR (2008) Non-dominated ranked genetic algorithm for solving multi-objective optimization problems: NRGA, J Theoret Appl Inf Technol, pp 60–67Google Scholar
  4. Liefooghe A, Paquete L, Simoes M, Figueira JR (2011) Connectedness and local search for bicriteria knapsack problems, EvoCOP 2011, LNCS 6622, pp 48–59Google Scholar
  5. Miller HJ, Han J (2009) Geographic data mining and knowledge discovery, 2nd edn. CRC Press, Boca RatonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Noller C, Smith VR (1987) Ultraviolet selection pressure on earliest organisms. In: Kingston H, Fulling CP (eds) Natural environment background analysis. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 211–219Google Scholar
  7. Segretier W, Collard M, Grandchamp E (2012) An heuristic-based approach for merging information layers in a GIS, GeoprocessingGoogle Scholar
  8. Tomlin CD (1990) Geographic information systems and cartographic modelling. Prentice-Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.LAMIA, Université Antilles Guyane, Campus de FouillolePointe-à-PitreFrance
  2. 2.Havana UniversityHavanaCuba

Personalised recommendations