A multiobjective model for generating optimal landmark sequences in pedestrian navigation applications

International Journal of Geographical Information Science

Volumn 25, Issue 5, 2011, Pages 785-805

  Fang, Zhixiang ^a   Li, Qingquan ^a   Zhang, Xing ^a  

^a WUHAN UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

Ant colony optimization; Landmark sequence; Multiple objectives; Pedestrian navigation

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; GIS; NAVIGATION; NUMERICAL MODEL; OPTIMIZATION; PEDESTRIAN;

EID: 79960345365     PISSN: 13658816     EISSN: 13623087     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/13658816.2010.500290     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Beeharee, A. and Steed, A., 2006. Natural wayfinding-exploiting photos in pedestrian navigationsystems. Proceedings, 8th conference on human-computer interaction with mobile devices andservices, 12-15 September, Espoo, Finland. New York: ACM Press, 81-88.
2. Bessho, M., et al., 2008. uNavi: implementation and deployment of a place-based pedestrian navigationSystem. IEEE international computer software and applications conference, 28 July-1August, Turku, Finland. Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society, 1254-1259.
3. Blum, C., 2005. Ant colony optimization: introduction and recent trends. Physics of Life Reviews, 2,353-373.
4. Burke, M. and Brown, A. L., 2007. Distances people walk for transport. Road & Transport Research,16 (3), 16-29.
5. Caduff, D. and Timpf, S., 2005. The landmark spider: representing landmark knowledge for wayfindingtasks. In: T. Barkowsky, et al., eds. Reasoning with mental and external diagrams: computationalmodeling and spatial assistance. Stanford, CA: AAAI Press, 30-35.
6. Caduff, D. and Timpf, S., 2008. On the assessment of landmark salience for human navigation. Cognitive Processing, 9 (4), 249-267.
7. Dijkstra, E. W., 1959. A note on two problems in connection with graphs. Numerische Mathematik, 1,269-271.
8. Elias, B., 2003. Extracting landmarks with data mining methods. In: W. Kuhn, M. Worboys, andS. Timpf, eds. Spatial information theory: foundations of geographic information science. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 2825. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 375-389.
9. Elias, B. and Paelke, V., 2008. User-centered design of landmark visualization. In: L. Meng, A. Zipf, and S. Winters, eds. Map-based mobile services-design, interaction, and usability. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 33-56.
10. Elias, B. and Sester, M., 2006. Incorporating landmarks with quality measures in routing procedures. In: M. Raubal, et al. eds. Geographic information science: 4th international conference, GIScience 2006, 20-23 September 2006 Muenster, Germany. Lecture Notes in ComputerScience, Vol. 4197. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 65-80.
11. Furlan, A., Baldwin, T., and Klippel, A., 2007. Landmark classification for route directions. Proceedings, 4th ACL-SIGSEM workshop on prepositions, 28 June Prague, Czech Republic. Morristown, New Jersey: Association for Computational Lingistics, 9-16.
12. Goodman, J., et al., 2004. Using landmarks to support older people in navigation. In: S. Brewster and M. Dunlop, eds. Proceedings, 6th international symposium on mobile human-computer interaction. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 3160. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 38-48.
13. Hile, H., et al., 2009. Landmark-based pedestrian navigation with enhanced spatial reasoning. Proceedings, seventh international conference on pervasive computing, 2009, Nara, Japan. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 59-76.
14. Hile, H., et al., 2008. Landmark-based pedestrian navigation from collections of geotagged photos. Proceedings, 7th international conference on mobile and ubiquitous multimedia, 3-5 December, Umeå, Sweden. New York: ACM Press, 145-152.
15. Li, X., He, J., and Liu, X., 2009a. Intelligent GIS for solving high-dimensional site selection problemsusing ant optimisation techniques. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 23(4), 399-416.
16. Li, X., He, J., and Liu, X., 2009b. Ant intelligence for solving optimal path-covering problems withmulti-objectives. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 23 (7), 839-857.
17. May, A., et al., 2003. Pedestrian navigation aids: information requirements and design implications. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 7, 331-338.
18. Millonig, A. and Schechtner, K., 2007. Developing landmark-based pedestrian navigation systems. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 8 (1), 43-49.
19. Paay, J. and Kjeldskov, J., 2008. Understanding the user experience of location-based services: fiveprinciples of perceptual organisation applied. Journal of Location Based Services, 2 (4), 267-286.
20. Raubal, M. and Winter, S., 2002. Enriching wayfinding instructions with local landmarks. In: M. Egenhofer and D. Mark, eds. Proceedings, second international conference on geographicinformation science. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 2478. Berlin: Springer, 243-259.
21. Richter, K., 2007. A uniform handling of different landmark types in route directions. In: S. Winter, et al., eds. Spatial information theory: International conference COSIT. Lecture Notes inComputer Science, Vol. 4736. Berlin: Springer, 373-389.
22. Richter, K., 2008. Context-specific route directions: generation of cognitively motivated wayfindinginstructions. In: DisKi 314/SFB/TR 8 monographs, Vol. 3. Amsterdam: IOS Press.
23. Roger, M., Bonnardel, N., and Bigot, L., 2009. Improving navigation messages for mobile urbanguides: effects of the guide's interlocutor model, spatial abilities, and use of landmarks on routedescription. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 39, 509-515.
24. Ross, T., May, A., and Thompson, S., 2004. The use of landmarks in pedestrian navigation instructionsand the effects of context. In: S. Brewster and M. Dunlop, eds. Proceedings, 6th internationalsymposium on mobile human-computer interaction. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 3160, 300-304.
25. Ryley, T. J., 2008. The propensity for motorists to walk for short trip: evidence from West Edinburgh. Transportation Research Part A, 42, 620-628.
26. Sobek, A. and Miller, H., 2006. U-Access: a web-based system for routing pedestrians of differingabilities. Journal of Geographical Systems, 8, 269-287.
27. Sorrows, M. E. and Hirtle, S. C., 1999. The nature of landmarks for real and electronic spaces. In:Proceedings, international conference on spatial information theory: cognitive and computationalfoundations of geographic information science. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 1661,37-50.
28. Spiers, H. and Maguire, E., 2008. The dynamic nature of cognition during wayfinding. Journal ofEnvironmental Psychology, 28, 232-249.
29. Swobodzinski, M. and Raubal, M., 2009. An indoor routing algorithm for the blind: development andcomparison to a routing algorithm for the sighted. International Journal of GeographicalInformation Science, 23 (10), 1315-1343.
30. Winter, S., et al., 2008. Landmark hierarchies in context. Environment and Planning B, 35 (3), 381-398.
31. Xia, J., et al., 2008. The wayfinding process relationships between decision-making and landmarkutility. Toursim Management, 29, 445-457.
32. Zeng, W. and Church, R. L., 2009. Finding shortest paths on real road networks: the case for A*. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 23 (4), 531-543.
33. Zereino, J., Antunes, A., and Cunba, M., 2010. Multi-objective model for regional wastewater systemsplanning. Civil Engineering and Environmental Systems, 27 (2), 95-106.