skip to main content
10.1145/3274895.3274913acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesgisConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Stepping stone graph for public movement analysis

Published:06 November 2018Publication History

ABSTRACT

There are many real world applications that require to identify movement of users such as identifying movement corridors, most popular paths, and nearest neighbours. If one is not given trajectories mapping to movement of people but rather sporadic location data, such as location based social network data, finding movement related information becomes difficult. Rather than processing all points in a data set given a query, a clever approach is to construct a graph, based on user locations, and query this graph for all queries. One example is the shortest path graph. However the shortest path graph can be inefficient and ineffective analysing movement, as it calculates the graph considering all points in a data set. We propose the stepping stone graph, which calculates graph considering point pairs rather than all points, that focuses on local possible movement, making it both efficient and effective for location based social network related queries. We demonstrate its uses by applying it in the aforementioned domain and comparing with the shortest path graph. We also compare its properties to a range of other graphs.

References

  1. Prosenjit Bose, Luc Devroye, William S. Evans, and David G. Kirkpatrick. 2006. On the Spanning Ratio of Gabriel Graphs and beta-Skeletons. SIAM J. Discrete Math. 20, 2 (2006), 412--427. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Jean Cardinal, Sébastien Collette, and Stefan Langerman. 2009. Empty region graphs. Computational geometry 42, 3 (2009), 183--195. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Junghoon Chae, Dennis Thom, Yun Jang, SungYe Kim, Thomas Ertl, and David S. Ebert. 2014. Public behavior response analysis in disaster events utilizing visual analytics of microblog data. Computers & Graphics 38 (2014), 51--60. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Jorge Cortés, Sonia Martínez, and Francesco Bullo. 2006. Robust rendezvous for mobile autonomous agents via proximity graphs in arbitrary dimensions. IEEE Trans. Automat. Control 51, 8 (2006), 1289--1298.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Mark de Berg, Wouter Meulemans, and Bettina Speckmann. 2011. Delineating imprecise regions via shortest-path graphs. In 19th ACM SIGSPATIAL International Symposium on Advances in Geographic Information Systems, ACM-GIS 2011, November 1-4, 2011, Chicago, IL, USA, Proceedings, Isabel F. Cruz, Divyakant Agrawal, Christian S. Jensen, Eyal Ofek, and Egemen Tanin (Eds.). ACM, 271--280. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Matt Duckham, Marc J. van Kreveld, Ross Purves, Bettina Speckmann, Yaguang Tao, Kevin Verbeek, and Jo Wood. 2016. Modeling Checkpoint-Based Movement with the Earth Mover's Distance, See {13}, 225--239.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. K Ruben Gabriel and Robert R Sokal. 1969. A new statistical approach to geographic variation analysis. Systematic Biology 18, 3 (1969), 259--278.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Erik G. Hoel, Shawn D. Newsam, Siva Ravada, Roberto Tamassia, and Goce Trajcevski (Eds.). 2017. Proceedings of the 25th ACM SIGSPATIAL International Conference on Advances in Geographic Information Systems, GIS 2017, Redondo Beach, CA, USA, November 7-10, 2017. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. David G Kirkpatrick and John D Radke. 1985. A framework for computational morphology. In Machine Intelligence and Pattern Recognition. Vol. 2. Elsevier, 217--248.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Kwan Hui Lim, Jeffrey Chan, Christopher Leckie, and Shanika Karunasekera. 2015. Personalized Tour Recommendation Based on User Interests and Points of Interest Visit Durations. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI 2015, Buenos Aires, Argentina, July 25-31, 2015, Qiang Yang and Michael Wooldridge (Eds.). AAAI Press, 1778--1784. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Alan M. MacEachren, Anuj R. Jaiswal, Anthony C. Robinson, Scott Pezanowski, Alexander Savelyev, Prasenjit Mitra, Xiao Zhang, and Justine I. Blanford. 2011. SensePlace2: GeoTwitter analytics support for situational awareness. In 2011 IEEE Conference on Visual Analytics Science and Technology, VAST 2011, Providence, Rhode Island, USA, October 23-28, 2011. IEEE Computer Society, 181--190.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Wouter Meulemans, Nathalie Henry Riche, Bettina Speckmann, Basak Alper, and Tim Dwyer. 2013. KelpFusion: A Hybrid Set Visualization Technique. IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics 19, 11 (2013), 1846--1858. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Jennifer A. Miller, David O'Sullivan, and Nancy Wiegand (Eds.). 2016. Geographic Information Science - 9th International Conference, GIScience 2016, Montreal, QC, Canada, September 27-30, 2016, Proceedings. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 9927. Springer.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Joon C. Park, Hayong Shin, and Byoung Kyu Choi. 2006. Elliptic Gabriel graph for finding neighbors in a point set and its application to normal vector estimation. Computer-Aided Design 38, 6 (2006), 619--626. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Dipto Sarkar, Renée Sieber, and Raja Sengupta. 2016. GIScience Considerations in Spatial Social Networks, See {13}, 85--98.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. David Sinclair. 2016. S-hull: a fast radial sweep-hull routine for Delaunay triangulation. CoRR abs/1604.01428 (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Bart Thomee, David A. Shamma, Gerald Friedland, Benjamin Elizalde, Karl Ni, Douglas Poland, Damian Borth, and Li-Jia Li. 2016. YFCC100M: the new data in multimedia research. Commun. ACM 59, 2 (2016), 64--73. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Godfried T Toussaint. 1980. The relative neighbourhood graph of a finite planar set. Pattern recognition 12, 4 (1980), 261--268.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Stepping stone graph for public movement analysis

    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
      SIGSPATIAL '18: Proceedings of the 26th ACM SIGSPATIAL International Conference on Advances in Geographic Information Systems
      November 2018
      655 pages
      ISBN:9781450358897
      DOI:10.1145/3274895

      Copyright © 2018 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: 6 November 2018

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      SIGSPATIAL '18 Paper Acceptance Rate30of150submissions,20%Overall Acceptance Rate220of1,116submissions,20%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader