Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Statistical Model for Directional Relations Between Spatial Objects

  • Published:
GeoInformatica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Directional relation, as a kind of spatial constraints, has been recognized as being an important means for spatial query, analysis and reasoning. Directional relation is conventionally concerned with two point objects. However, in spatial query and analysis, there is also a need of directional relations between point and line, point and area, line and line, line and area, and area and area. Therefore, conventional definition of direction needs to be extended to include line and area objects (i.e. the so-called extended objects). Existing models for directional relation of extended objects make use of approximate representations (e.g. minimum bounding rectangles) of the extended objects so as to produce some results with unrealistic impression. In this paper, a statistical model is presented. In this new model, (1) an extended spatial object is decomposed into small components; (2) the directional relation between extended spatial objects is then determined by the directions between these small components which form a distribution; and (3) two measures (i.e. range and median direction) are utilized to describe the statistical property of the distribution. This statistical model is based upon the (extended) spatial objects themselves, instead of their approximate representations. An experimental test has been carried out and the result indicates that the directional relations computed from this model is very close to those perceived by human beings.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. A.I. Abdelmoty and M.H.Williams. “Approaches to the representation of qualitative spatial relationship for geographic database,” in M. Molenaar and S de Hoop (Eds.), Proceedings of Advanced Geographic Data Modeling, Vol. 40:204–216, The Netherlands Geodetic Commission, 1994.

  2. J.F. Allen. “Maintaining knowledge about temporal intervals,” Communications of the ACM, Vol. 26(11):832–843, 1983.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. R. Billen and E. Clementini. “Introducing a reasoning system based on ternary projective relations,” in P. Fisher (Ed.), Developments in Spatial Data Handling, 381–394, 2004.

  4. B. Bennett. “Logical representations for automated reasoning about spatial relations,” Ph.D thesis, School of Computer Studies, University of Leeds, 1997.

  5. T. Bruns and M. Egenhofer. “Similarity of spatial scenes,” in M.J. Kraak and M. Molenaar (Eds.), The 7th International Symposium on Spatial Data Handling. Delft: The Netherlands, 173–184, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  6. S.K. Chang, Q.S. Shi, and C.W. Yan. “Iconic indexing by 2D-strings,” IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, Vol. 9(6):413–428, 1987.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. S.K. Chang and E. Jungert. Symbolic projection for image information retrieval and spatial reasoning. London: Academic, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  8. J. Chen, C. Li, Z. Li, and C. Gold. “A Voronoi-based 9-intersection model for spatial relations,” International Journal of Geographical Information Science, Vol. 15(3):201–220, 2001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. S. Cicerone and P. Di Felice. “Cardinal directions between spatial objects: the pairwise-consistency problem,” Information Sciences, Vol. 164(2004):165–188.

    Google Scholar 

  10. C. Claramunt and M. Thériault. “Fuzzy semantics for directional relations between composite regions,” Information Sciences, Vol. 160:73–90, 2004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. E. Clementini, P. Di Felice, and D. Hernández. “Qualitative representation of positional information,” Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 95(2):317–356, 1997.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. S. Coros, J. Ni, and P. Matsakis. “Object localization based on directional information: case of 2D vector data,” in Proceedings of the 14th Annual ACM International Symposium on Advances in Geographic Information Systems, pp. 163–170, Virginia, USA, November 10–11, 2006.

  13. Z. Cui, A.G. Cohn, and D.A. Randell. “Qualitative and topological relationships in spatial databases,” in Proceedings of SSD-93, pp. 296–315, 1993.

  14. M. Deng, X. Chen, and Z. Li. “A generalized Hausdorff distance for spatial objects in GIS,” in C. Gold (Ed.), Proceedings of the 4th ISPRS Workshop on Dynamic and Multi-dimensional GIS, 10–15, UK, 2005.

  15. M. Egenhofer and R. Franzosa. “Point-set topological spatial relationships,” International Journal of Geographical Information Systems, Vol. 5(2):161–174, 1991.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. B. Faltings. “Qualitative spatial reasoning using algebraic topology,” in Proceedings of COSIT-95, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 988, Springer, Berlin, 1995.

  17. A. Frank. “Qualitative spatial reasoning about distances and directions in geographic space,” Journal of Visual Language and Computing, Vol. 3:343–371, 1992.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. A. Frank. “Qualitative spatial reasoning: Cardinal directions as an example,” International Journal of Geographic Information Systems, Vol. 10(3):269–290, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  19. C. Freksa. “Using orientation information for qualitative spatial reasoning,” in A.U. Frank, I. Campari, and U. Formentini (Eds.), Theories and Methods of Spatio-Temporal Reasoning in Geographic Space, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 639. Springer: New York, 162–178, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  20. C. Freksa and R. Röhrig. “Dimensions of qualitative spatial reasoning,” in N.P. Carret and M.G.Singh (Eds.), Qualitative Reasoning and Decision Technologies, Proceedings of QUARDET’ 93. CIMNE: Barcelona, 483–492, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  21. F. Godoy and A. Rodriguez. “A qualitative description of spatial configurations,” in D. Richardson and P. van Oosterom (Eds.), Advances in Spatial Data Handling. Springer: Ottawa, 292–312, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  22. R. Goyal. “Similarity assessment for cardinal directions between extended spatial objects,” Ph.D thesis, University of Maine, Orono, ME, 2000.

  23. R. Haar. Computational models of spatial relations. Technical report: TR-478, MSC-72-03610, Computer Science, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, 1976.

  24. D. Hernández. “Qualitative representation of spatial knowledge,” Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 804, Springer, 1994.

  25. Z.L. Li, R.L. Zhao, and J. Chen. “A Voronoi-based spatial algebra for spatial relations,” Progress in Natural Science, Vol. 12(7):528–536, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  26. G. Ligozat. “Reasoning about cardinal directions,” Journal of Visual Languages and Computing, Vol. 9:23–44, 1998.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. X. Liu and S. Shekhar. “Object-based directional query processing in spatial databases,” IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, Vol. 15(2):295–304, 2003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. D.M. Mark, A.U. Frank, M.J. Egenhofer, S.M. Freundschuh, M. McGranaghan, and R.M. White. “Languages of spatial relations,” Initiative 2: Meeting Report, TR89-2, NCGIA, 1989.

  29. A. Mukerjee and G.A. Joe. “Qualitative model for space,” in Proceedings of the 8th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Boston, MA, 721–727, 1990.

  30. D. Papadias. “Relation-based representation of spatial knowledge,” Ph.D thesis, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, 1994.

  31. D. Papadias, Y. Theodoridis, T. Sellis, and M. Egenhofer. “Topological relations in the world of minimum bounding rectangles: A study with R-trees,” in Proceedings of ACM SIGMOD-95, 92–103, 1995.

  32. D. Papadias and M. Egenhofer. “Algorithms for hierarchical spatial reasoning,” GeoInformatica, Vol. 1(3):251–273, 1997.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. D. Peuquet and C.X. Zhan. “An algorithm to determine the directional relationship between arbitrary-shape polygons in the plane,” Pattern Recognition, Vol. 20(1):65–74, 1987.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. D. Pullar and M. Egenhofer. “Toward formal definitions of topological relations among spatial objects,” in Proceedings of the 3rd International Symposium on Spatial Data Handling, Sydney, Australia, August, 1988.

  35. D.A. Randell, Z. Cui, and A. Cohn. “A spatial logic based on regions and connection,” in M. Kaufmann and S. Mateo (Eds.), in Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, pp. 165–176, Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  36. J. Renz and B. Nebel. “On the complexity of qualitative spatial reasoning: A maximal tractable fragment of the region connection calculus,” Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 108(1–2):69–123, 1999.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. R. Röhrig. “A theory for qualitative spatial reasoning based on order relations,” in Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 2, 1418–1423, 1994.

  38. C. Schlieder. “Representing visible locations for qualitative navigation,” in N. Carreté and M.G. Singh (Eds.), Qualitative Reasoning and Decision Technologies, 523–532, CIMNE, Barcelona, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  39. J. Sharma. “Integrated spatial reasoning in geographic information systems: Combining topology and direction,” Ph.D thesis, The Graduate School, University of Maine, 1996.

  40. A.P. Sistla, C. Yu, and R. Haddad. “Reasoning about spatial relationships in picture retrieval systems,” in Proceedings of VLDB-94, 570–581, 1994.

  41. S. Skiadopoulos and M. Koubarakis. “Composing cardinal directions relations,” in Proceedings of the 7th International Symposium on Spatial and Temporal Databases (SSTD’01), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 2121, Springer, Berlin, 299–317, 2001.

  42. Y. Theodoridis, D. Papadias, and E. Stefanakis. “Supporting directional relations in spatial database systems,” in J.M. Kraak and M. Moleenar (Eds.), Proceedings of the 7th International Symposium on Spatial Data Handling, Taylor Francis, Delft, The Netherlands, 739–752, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  43. H. Yan, Y. Chu, Z. Li, and R. Guo. “A quantitative description model for directional relations based on direction groups,” Geoinformatica, Vol. 10(2):177–195, 2006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work is supported by the RGC of Hong Kong (project PolyU 5228/06E) and the Hong Kong Polytechnic University (project G-T873).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Land Surveying and Geo-Informatics, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, Hong Kong

    Min Deng & Zhilin Li

Authors
  1. Min Deng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Zhilin Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zhilin Li.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Deng, M., Li, Z. A Statistical Model for Directional Relations Between Spatial Objects. Geoinformatica 12, 193–217 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10707-007-0031-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10707-007-0031-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation