Skip to main content
Log in

A constraint-based approach to spatiotemporal reasoning

  • Published:
Applied Intelligence Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We introduce a form of spatiotemporal reasoning that uses homogeneous representations of time and the three dimensions of space. The basis of our approach is Allen's temporal logic on the one hand and general constraint satisfaction algorithms on the other, where we present a new view of constraint reasoning to cope with the affordances of spatiotemporal reasoning as introduced here. As a realization for constraint reasoning, we suggest a massively parallel implementation in form of Boltzmann machines.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. A. Kak, “Spatial reasoning,”Al Magazine vol. 9, no. 2, p. 23, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  2. J. F. Allen, “Maintaining knowledge about temporal intervals,”Commun. ACM vol. 26, pp. 832–843, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  3. C. Freksa, “Qualitative spatial reasoning,” inProc. Workshop RAUM, Koblenz, Germany, 1990, pp. 21–36, Universität Koblenz-Landau, Fachberichte Informatik No. 9/90.

  4. H. W. Guesgen, “Four-dimensional reasoning,” inProc. IASTED Int. Conf. Expert Systems: Theory and Applications, Long Beach, CA, 1989, pp. 99–103.

  5. D. Hernandez, “Using comparative relations to represent spatial knowledge,” inProc. Workshop RAUM, Koblenz, Germany, 1990, pp. 69–80, Universität Koblenz-Landau, Fachberichte Informatik No. 9/90.

  6. A. Mukerjee and G. Joe, “A qualitative model for space,” inProc. 9th AAAI, Boston, MA, 1990, pp. 721–727.

  7. A. K. Mackworth, “Consistency in networks of relations,”J. Artif. Intell. vol. 8, pp. 99–118, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Y. Descotte and J. C. Latombe, “Making compromises among antagonist constraints in a planner,”J. Artif. Intell. vol. 2, pp. 183–217, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  9. A. Borning, R. Duisberg, B. Freeman-Benson, A. Kramer, and M. Woolf, “Constraint hierarchies,” inProc. 1987 ACM Conf. Objecct-Oriented Programming Systems, Languages and Applications, Orlando, FL, 1987, pp. 48–60.

  10. B. N. Freeman-Benson, J. Maloney, and A. Borning. “An incremental constraint solver,”Commun. ACM vol. 33, pp. 54–63, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  11. J. Hertzberg, H. W. Guesgen, A. Voss, M. Fidelak, and H. Voss, “Relaxing constraint networks to resolve in-consistencies,” inProc. 12th GWAI, Eringerfeld, Germany, 1988, pp. 61–65.

  12. E. C. Freuder, “Partial constraint satisfaction,” inProc. 11th IJCAI, Detroit, MI, 1989, pp. 278–283.

  13. H. W. Guesgen and J. Hertzberg,A Perspective of Constraint-Based Reasoning. An Introductory Tutorial, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 597, Springer: Berlin, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  14. R. Dechter and J. Pearl, “Network-based heuristics for constraint-satisfaction problems,”J. Artif. Intell. vol. 34, pp. 1–38, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  15. E. Aarts and J. Korst,Simulated Annealing and Boltz-mann Machines, John Wiley & Sons: Cichester, England, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  16. M. D. Johnston and H. M. Adorf, “Learning in stochastic neural networks for constraint satisfaction problems,” inProc. NASA Conf. Space Telerobotics, edited by G. Rodriguez and H. Seraij, JPL Publ., Pasadena, CA, 1989, pp. 367–376.

    Google Scholar 

  17. D. Bolz and K. Wittur, “Die Umsetzung deklarativer Beschreibungen von Graphiken durch Simulated Annealing,” inProc. GI-Fachgespräch Graphik und KI, edited by P. Wißkirchen and K. Kansy, Springer: Berlin, Germany, 1990, pp. 68–77.

    Google Scholar 

  18. J. A. Feldman and D. H. Ballard, “Connectionist models and their properties,”J. Cogn. Sci. vol. 6, pp. 201–254, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Y. Shoham and D. V. McDermott, “Problems in formal temporal reasoning,”J. Artif. Intell. vol. 36, pp. 49–61, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  20. G. Retz-Schmidt, “Various views on spatial prepositions,”AI Magazine vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 95–105, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  21. P. J. Hayes, “The naive physics manifesto,” inExpert Systems in the Micro-Electronic Age, edited by D. Michie, Edinburgh University Press: Edinburgh, 1979, pp. 242–270.

    Google Scholar 

  22. E. Tsang and R. Howarth, “Scheduling in both space and time,” inProc. 11th Int. Workshop Expert Syst. Appl., vol. 3, Avignon, France, pp. 361–372, 1991.

  23. T. L. Dean and D. V. McDermott, “Temporal data base management,”J. Artif. Intell. vol. 32, pp. 1–55, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  24. U. Montanari, “Networks of constraints: Fundamental properties and applications to picture processing,”Information Sci. vol. 7, pp. 95–132, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  25. R. A. Hummel and S. W. Zucker, “On the foundations of relaxation labeling processes,”IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Machine Intell. vol. 5, pp. 267–287, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  26. U. Montanari and F. Rossi, “Constraint relaxation may be perfect,”J. Artif. Intell. vol. 48, pp. 143–170, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Guesgen, H.W., Hertzberg, J. A constraint-based approach to spatiotemporal reasoning. Appl Intell 3, 71–90 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00871723

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00871723

Key words

Navigation