skip to main content
10.1145/2661829.2661861acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescikmConference Proceedingsconference-collections
poster

Travel distance versus navigation complexity: a study on different spatial queries on road networks

Authors Info & Claims
Published:03 November 2014Publication History

ABSTRACT

Research on cognitive science indicates that humans often use different criteria for route selection. An alternative type of spatial proximity search on road networks recently has been proposed to find the easiest-to-reach neighboring object with the smallest navigation complexity. This paper presents an evaluation to compare the effectiveness of easiest-to-reach neighbor query against a classic nearest neighbor query in a real-world setting. Our user study demonstrates usability of the new spatial query type and suggests people may not always care about travel distance most. To provide flexibility to accommodate different requirements, we also show how to achieve tradeoff between navigation complexity and travel distance for advanced navigational assistance.

References

  1. M. Duckham and L. Kulik. "Simplest" paths: Automated route selection for navigation. In Spatial Information Theory. Foundations of Geographic Information Science, International Conference, COSIT 2003, Ittingen, Switzerland, September 24-28, 2003, Proceedings, pages 169--185, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. R. G. Golledge. Path selection and route preference in human navigation: A progress report. In Spatial Information Theory: A Theoretical Basis for GIS, International Conference COSIT '95, Semmering, Austria, September 21-23, 1995, Proceedings, pages 207--222, 1995.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. S. Haque, L. Kulik, and A. Klippel. Algorithms for reliable navigation and wayfinding. In Spatial Cognition V: Reasoning, Action, Interaction, International Conference Spatial Cognition 2006, Bremen, Germany, September 24-28, 2006, Revised Selected Papers, pages 308--326, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. X. Huang, C. S. Jensen, H. Lu, and S. Saltenis. S-grid: A versatile approach to efficient query processing in spatial networks. In Advances in Spatial and Temporal Databases, 10th International Symposium, SSTD 2007, Boston, MA, USA, July 16-18, 2007, Proceedings, pages 93--111, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. B. Jiang and X. Liu. Computing the fewest-turn map directions based on the connectivity of natural roads. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 25(7):1069--1082, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. A. Klippel, H. Tappe, and C. Habel. Pictorial representations of routes: Chunking route segments during comprehension. In Spatial Cognition III, Routes and Navigation, Human Memory and Learning, Spatial Representation and Spatial Learning, pages 11--33, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. M. R. Kolahdouzan and C. Shahabi. Voronoi-based k nearest neighbor search for spatial network databases. In Proceedings of the 2004 International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, pages 840--851, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. D. M. Mark. Automated route selection for navigation. IEEE Aerospace and Electronic Systems Magazine, 1(9):2--5, 1986.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. D. Papadias, J. Zhang, N. Mamoulis, and Y. Tao. Query processing in spatial network databases. In Proceedings of the 2003 International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, pages 802--813, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. K.-F. Richter and M. Duckham. Simplest instructions: Finding easy-to-describe routes for navigation. In Geographic Information Science, 5th International Conference, GIScience 2008, Park City, UT, USA, September 23-26, 2008. Proceedings, pages 274--289, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. H. Samet, J. Sankaranarayanan, and H. Alborzi. Scalable network distance browsing in spatial databases. In Proceedings of the 2008 ACM International Conference on Management of Data, pages 43--54, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. J. Shao, L. Kulik, and E. Tanin. Easiest-to-reach neighbor search. In Proceedings of the 2010 ACM International Conference on Advances in Geographic Information Systems, pages 360--369, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. S. Winter. Weighting the path continuation in route planning. In Proceedings of the 2001 ACM International Symposium on Advances in Geographic Information Systems, pages 173--176, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. S. Winter. Modeling costs of turns in route planning. GeoInformatica, 6(4):363--380, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Travel distance versus navigation complexity: a study on different spatial queries on road networks

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        CIKM '14: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM International Conference on Conference on Information and Knowledge Management
        November 2014
        2152 pages
        ISBN:9781450325981
        DOI:10.1145/2661829

        Copyright © 2014 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 3 November 2014

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • poster

        Acceptance Rates

        CIKM '14 Paper Acceptance Rate175of838submissions,21%Overall Acceptance Rate1,861of8,427submissions,22%

        Upcoming Conference

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader