skip to main content
10.1145/3356395.3365545acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesgisConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Semantics-enabled Spatio-Temporal Modeling of Earth Observation Data: An application to Flood Monitoring

Authors Info & Claims
Published:05 November 2019Publication History

ABSTRACT

Extreme events such as urban floods are dynamic in nature, i.e. they evolve with time. The spatiotemporal analysis of such disastrous events is important for understanding the resiliency of an urban system during these events. Remote Sensing (RS) data is one of the crucial earth observation (EO) data sources that can facilitate such spatiotemporal analysis due to its wide spatial coverage and high temporal availability. In this paper, we propose a discrete mereotopology (DM) based approach to enable representation and querying of spatiotemporal information from a series of multitemporal RS images that are acquired during a flood disaster event. We represent this spatiotemporal information using a semantic model called Dynamic Flood Ontology (DFO). To establish the effectiveness and applicability of the proposed approach, spatiotemporal queries relevant during an urban flood scenario such as, show me road segments that were partially flooded during the time interval t1 have been demonstrated with promising results.

References

  1. James F Allen. 1990. Maintaining knowledge about temporal intervals. In Readings in qualitative reasoning about physical systems. Elsevier, 361--372.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Alessandro Artale and Enrico Franconi. 2000. A survey of temporal extensions of description logics. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 30, 1-4 (2000), 171--210.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Sotiris Batsakis and Euripides GM Petrakis. 2010. SOWL: spatiotemporal representation, reasoning and querying over the semantic web. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Semantic Systems. ACM, 15.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. M. Datcu, H. Daschiel, A. Pelizzari, M. Quartulli, A. Galoppo, A. Colapicchioni, M. Pastori, K. Seidel, P. G. Marchetti, and S. D'Elia. 2003. Information mining in remote sensing image archives: system concepts. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 41, 12 (Dec 2003), 2923--2936. https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2003.817197Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Antony Galton. 1999. The mereotopology of discrete space. In International Conference on Spatial Information Theory. Springer, 251--266.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. W3C Working Group. 2006. Defining N-ary Relations on the Semantic Web. https://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-n-aryRelations/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Thomas R Gruber. 1993. A translation approach to portable ontology specifications. Knowledge acquisition 5, 2 (1993), 199--220.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Claudio Gutierrez, Carlos A Hurtado, and Alejandro Vaisman. 2007. Introducing time into RDF. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 19, 2 (2007).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Benjamin Harbelot, Helbert Arenas, and Christophe Cruz. 2015. LC3: A spatiotemporal and semantic model for knowledge discovery from geospatial datasets. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web 35 (2015), 3--24.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Michel CA Klein and Dieter Fensel. 2001. Ontology versioning on the Semantic Web.. In SWWS. 75--91.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Kuldeep R Kurte, Surya S Durbha, Roger L King, Nicolas H Younan, and Abhishek V Potnis. 2017. A spatiotemporal ontological model for flood disaster monitoring. In Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium (IGARSS), 2017 IEEE International. IEEE, 5213--5216.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. K. R. Kurte, S. S. Durbha, R. L. King, N. H. Younan, and R. Vatsavai. 2017. Semantics-Enabled Framework for Spatial Image Information Mining of Linked Earth Observation Data. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing 10, 1 (Jan 2017), 29--44. https://doi.org/10.1109/JSTARS.2016.2547992Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Carsten Lutz, Frank Wolter, and Michael Zakharyaschev. 2008. Temporal description logics: A survey. In Temporal Representation and Reasoning, 2008. TIME'08. 15th International Symposium on. IEEE, 3--14.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. David A Randell, Zhan Cui, and Anthony G Cohn. 1992. A spatial logic based on regions and connection. KR 92 (1992), 165--176.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. David A Randell, Gabriel Landini, and Antony Galton. 2013. Discrete mereotopology for spatial reasoning in automated histological image analysis. IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence 35, 3 (2013), 568--581.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. W3C Recommendation. 2012. OWL 2 Web Ontology Language Document Overview (Second Edition). https://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-overview/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. W3C Recommendation. 2017. Time Ontology in OWL. https://www.w3.org/TR/owl-time/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Chi-Ren Shyu, Matt Klaric, Grant J Scott, Adrian S Barb, Curt H Davis, and Kannappan Palaniappan. 2007. GeoIRIS: Geospatial information retrieval and indexing system---Content mining, semantics modeling, and complex queries. IEEE Transactions on geoscience and remote sensing 45, 4 (2007), 839--852.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Theodore Sider. 1997. Four-dimensionalism. The Philosophical Review 106, 2 (1997), 197--231.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Jonas Tappolet and Abraham Bernstein. 2009. Applied temporal RDF: Efficient temporal querying of RDF data with SPARQL. In European Semantic Web Conference. Springer, 308--322.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Kenneth W Tobin, Budhendra L Bhaduri, Eddie A Bright, Anil Cheriyadat, Thomas P Karnowski, Paul J Palathingal, Thomas E Potok, and Jeffery R Price. 2006. Automated feature generation in large-scale geospatial libraries for content-based indexing. Photogrammetric Engineering & Remote Sensing 72, 5 (2006), 531--540.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Chris Welty, Richard Fikes, and Selene Makarios. 2006. A reusable ontology for fluents in OWL. In FOIS, Vol. 150. 226--236.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Semantics-enabled Spatio-Temporal Modeling of Earth Observation Data: An application to Flood Monitoring

        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
          ARIC'19: Proceedings of the 2nd ACM SIGSPATIAL International Workshop on Advances on Resilient and Intelligent Cities
          November 2019
          56 pages
          ISBN:9781450369541
          DOI:10.1145/3356395

          Copyright © 2019 ACM

          © 2019 Association for Computing Machinery. ACM acknowledges that this contribution was authored or co-authored by an employee, contractor or affiliate of the United States government. As such, the United States Government retains a nonexclusive, royalty-free right to publish or reproduce this article, or to allow others to do so, for Government purposes only.

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 5 November 2019

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article
          • Research
          • Refereed limited

          Acceptance Rates

          ARIC'19 Paper Acceptance Rate10of16submissions,63%Overall Acceptance Rate10of16submissions,63%

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader