Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A framework for assisted proximity analysis in feature data

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Geographical Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This framework for assisted proximity analysis in feature data consists of a hierarchy of proximity classes that use spatial neighborhoods as fundamental building blocks. The instances are spatial relations between isolated objects, or objects in a cluster, sharing the relational properties of reflexivity/irreflexivity and symmetry/asymmetry. The framework proposes ways of generating spatial neighborhoods and includes a discussion of how to deal with the vagueness inherent in nearness relations. It is applied to a realistic use case of epizootic disease outbreak. The framework updates the current state of knowledge in the field by considering: (1) spatial objects in a cluster, (2) spatially coextensive regions, and (3) regions in a partition chain. It relates ways of generating spatial neighborhoods to the proximity classes and introduces a number of yes–no questions to be implemented as a sequence of functions in a GIS system. The objective of the latter is to assist non-expert users, such as decision-makers, in carrying out proximity analyses. This is the first time that such a comprehensive framework has been proposed.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. http://desktop.arcgis.com/en/arcmap/10.3/analyze/commonly-used-tools/proximity-analysis.htm.

  2. The \(\delta\)-notation for proximity is borrowed from Efremovič (1951). The superscript 1 is a sequence number, the subscript s indicates that the relations of this proximity class are symmetric. Superscript and subscript are aligned with those in Brennan and Martin (2012).

  3. Brennan and Martin (2012) omit the conjunct \((IA(x)\ \cap \ y\ = \emptyset )\) in \(Near^{3}_{a}\). The subscript a indicates that the relations of this proximity class are asymmetric.

  4. Worboys (2001) uses a similar example to motivate the notion of weak symmetry which is interpreted in a four-valued logic (Belnap 1977): Keele, a village in the vicinity of the city of Stoke-on-Trent, can be thought of as being near Stoke-on-Trent, but the converse is less true.

  5. Conversely, the proximity notions \(Near^{2}_{a}\) and \(Near^{5}_{a}\) in Brennan and Martin (2012) are not considered in this article. \(Near^{2}_{a}\) imposes a metric restriction on the relative extents of two intersecting impact areas, \(Near^{5}_{a}\) defines the special case where one impact area is subsumed by the other.

  6. https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/.

  7. It is worth noting that \(\biguplus _{i=1}^{n}\) is the inline notation of the symbol used in Eq. 6.

  8. A set of points is said to be convex if it contains the straight line segments connecting each pair of its points.

  9. In an asymmetric case, x cannot be in the same cluster as \(y_{i}\) since \(\delta ^{5}\) is by definition symmetric inside a cluster.

  10. In ArcGIS (https://www.arcgis.com/), impact areas can be generated in this way by computing so-called service areas.

  11. https://www.english-corpora.org/coca/.

  12. https://www.english-corpora.org/wiki/.

  13. The design of the experiment was such that not near might have been a surrogate masking antonymical predicates such as far. Assuming that near and far are no strict antonyms, then the structure underlying the data could also be described in the two-valued logic used in the framework presented here: \(near \wedge far\) (empty set), \(near \wedge \lnot far\) (nearness neighborhood), \(\lnot near \wedge \lnot far\) (broad boundary), and \(\lnot near \wedge far\) (area beyond the boundary).

  14. https://www.ge.ch/document/rapport-gestion-2006-du-conseil-etat-republique-canton-geneve.

  15. http://desktop.arcgis.com/en/arcmap/10.3/tools/coverage-toolbox/buffer.htm.

  16. http://desktop.arcgis.com/en/arcmap/10.3/map/working-with-layers/using-select-by-location.htm.

References

  • Barouni F, Moulin B (2015) An intelligent spatial proximity system using neurofuzzy classifiers and contextual information. Geomatica 69(3):285–296

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belnap ND (1977) A useful four-valued logic. In: Modern uses of multiple-valued logic, vol 2 of Episteme. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 5–37

  • Bera R, Claramunt C (2003) Topology-based proximities in spatial systems. J Geograph Syst 5(4):353–379

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brennan J, Martin E (2012) Spatial proximity is more than just a distance measure. Int J Hum Comput Stud 70(1):88–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calegari GR, Carlino E, Celino I, Peroni D (2016) Supporting geo-ontology engineering through spatial data analytics. In: Sack H, Blomqvist E, d’Aquin M, Ghidini C, Ponzetto PS, Lange C (eds) The semantic web. Latest advances and new domains: 13th international conference, ESWC (2016) Heraklion, Crete, Greece, May 29–June 2, 2016, Proceedings, vol 9678 of Lecture notes in computer science. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 556–571

  • Carbon C-C, Leder H (2005) The Wall inside the brain: overestimation of distances crossing the former Iron Curtain. Psychon Bull Rev 12(4):746–750

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlson LA, Covey ES (2005) How far is near? Inferring distance from spatial descriptions. Lang Cognit Process 20(5):617–631

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carral D, Scheider S, Janowicz K, Vardeman C, Krisnadhi AA, Hitzler P (2013) An ontology design pattern for cartographic map scaling. In: Cimiano P, Corcho Ó, Presutti V, Hollink L, Rudolph S (eds) The semantic web: semantics and big data, 10th international conference, ESWC 2013, Montpellier, France, May 26-30, 2013. Proceedings, vol. 7882 of Lecture notes in computer science. Springer, pp 76–93

  • Cohn AG, Gotts NM (1996) The ‘egg-yolk’ representation of regions with indeterminate boundaries. In: Burrough PA, Frank AU (eds) Geographic objects with indeterminate boundaries. Francis Taylor, London, pp 171–187

    Google Scholar 

  • Degenhardt B, Kienast F, Buchecker M (2010) Einflussfaktoren des Naherholungsverhaltens im periurbanen Raum. Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Forstwesen 161(3):75–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denofsky ME (1976) How near is near? A near specialist, vol. 344 of AI Memo. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, pp 1–75

    Google Scholar 

  • Derungs C, Purves RS (2016) Mining nearness relations from an n-grams Web corpus in geographical space. Spat Cognit Comput 16(4):301–322

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dolbear C, Hart G, Goodwin J (2007) From theory to query: using ontologies to make explicit imprecise spatial relationships for database querying. In: Winter S, Duckham M, Kulik L, Kuipers B (eds) Proceedings of the 8th international conference on spatial information theory, COSIT 2007, Melbourne, Australia, September 19–23, 2007, vol. 4736 of information systems and applications. Springer, Berlin

  • Efremovič VA (1951) Infinitesimal spaces. Dokl Akad Nauk SSSR (N.S.) 76:341–343

    Google Scholar 

  • Egenhofer MJ, Mark DM (1995) Naive geography. In: Frank AU, Kuhn W (eds) Spatial information theory: a theoretical basis for GIS, vol. 988 of Lecture notes in computer science. Springer, Berlin, pp 1–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Ekman G, Bratfisch O (1966) Subjective distance and emotional involvement. A psychological mechanism. Acta Psychologica 25:1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher PF, Orf TM (1991) An investigation of the meaning of near and close on a university campus. Comput Environ Urban Syst 15(1–2):23–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gahegan M (1995) Proximity operators for qualitative spatial reasoning. In: Frank AU, Kuhn W (eds) Spatial information theory: a theoretical basis for GIS. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 988. Springer, Berlin, pp 31–44

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Grütter R, Scharrenbach T, Waldvogel B (2010) Vague spatio-thematic query processing—a qualitative approach to spatial closeness. Trans GIS 14(2):97–109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall MM, Jones CB (2008) A field based representation for vague areas defined by spatial prepositions. In: Methodologies and resources for processing spatial language, Workshop at LREC’2008, Marrakech, Morocco, 31 May 2008, pp 36–41

  • Helming I, Bernstein A, Grütter R, Vock S (2011) Making close to suitable for web search—a comparison of two approaches. In: Grütter R, Kolas D, Koubarakis M, Pfoser D (eds) Proceedings of the Terra Cognita 2011 workshop on foundations, technologies and applications of the geospatial web, vol. 798 of CEUR workshop proceedings. Sun SITE Central Europe, Aachen Tilburg, pp 101–113

  • Hernández D (1994) Qualitative representation of spatial knowledge, vol. 804 of Lecture notes in artificial intelligence. Springer, Berlin

  • Hirtle SC, Jonides J (1985) Evidence of hierarchies in cognitive maps. Memory Cognit 13(3):208–217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Irngartinger C, Degenhardt B, Buchecker M (2010) Naherholungsverhalten und -ansprüche in Schweizer Agglomerationen. Ergebnisse einer Befragung der St. Galler Bevölkerung 2009. Technical report, Eidg. Forschungsanstalt WSL, Zürcherstrasse 111, CH-8903 Birmensdorf

  • Jones CB, Purves RS (2008) Geographical information retrieval. Int J Geograph Inf Sci 22(3):219–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kettani D, Moulin B (1999) A spatial model based on the notions of spatial conceptual map and of object’s influence areas. In: Freksa C, Mark DM (eds) Spatial information theory: cognitive and computational foundations of geographic information science, International conference COSIT’99, Stade, Germany, August 25–29, 1999. Proceedings, vol. 1661 of Lecture notes in computer science. Springer, pp 401–416

  • Kienast F, Degenhardt B, Weilenmann B, Wäger Y, Buchecker M (2012) Gis-assisted mapping of landscape suitability for nearby recreation. Landsc Urban Plan 105(4):385–399

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kromrey H, Roose J, Strübing J (2016)Empirische Sozialforschung, 13th edn. UVK Verlagsgesellschaft mbH, Konstanz München

  • Leidner JL (2007) Toponym resolution in text: annotation, evaluation and applications of spatial grounding of place names. Dissertation.com, Boca Raton, Florida, USA

  • Leidner JL, Lieberman MD (2011) Detecting geographical references in the form of place names and associated spatial natural language. SIGSPATIAL Spec 3(2):5–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maki RH (1981) Categorization and distance effects with spatial linear orders. J Exp Psychol Hum Learn Memory 7(1):15–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNamara TP (1986) Mental representations of spatial relations. Cognit Psychol 18(1):87–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNamara TP, Hardy JK, Hirtle SC (1989) Subjective hierarchies in spatial memory. J Exp Psychol Learn Memory Cognit 15(2):211–227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Müller K, Steinmeier C, Küchler M (2010) Urban growth along motorways in Switzerland. Landsc Urban Plan 98(1):3–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen TAS, Hovgesen HH (2008) Exploratory mapping of commuter flows in England and Wales. J Transp Geogr 16(2):90–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Novel M, Grütter R, Boley H, Bernstein A (accepted) Nearness as context-dependent expression: an integrative review of modelling, measurement and contextual properties. Spat Cognit Comput Interdiscip J

  • Olshavsky RW, MacKay DB, Sentell G (1975) Perceptual maps of supermarket locations. J Appl Psychol 60(1):80–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Özçep OL, Grütter R, Möller R (2012a) Dynamics of a nearness relation–first results. In: Bhatt M, Guesgen HW, Davis E (eds) Spatio-temporal dynamics: ECAI 2012 workshop proceedings of STeDy 2012, Montpellier, France, August 27–28, 2012, vol. 030-08/2012 of SFB/TR 8 Report. Universität Bremen/Universität Freiburg, pp 1–7

  • Özçep OL, Grütter R, Möller R (2012b) Nearness rules and scaled proximity. In: Raedt LD, Bessiere C, Dubois D, Doherty P, Frasconi P, Heintz F, Lucas P (eds) Frontiers in artificial intelligence and applications. Proceedings of the 20th European conference on artificial intelligence (ECAI (2012) Montpellier, France, August 27–31, 2012, vol 242. IOS Press, Amsterdam, pp 636–641

  • Perler L (2007) Geflügelgrippe: Ursprung - Entwicklung - Ausblick. Eidgenössisches Volkswirtschaftsdepartement EVD, Bundesamt für Veterinärwesen BVET. http://docplayer.org/34156871-Gefluegelgrippe-ursprung-entwicklung-ausblick.html. Accessed 18 July 2019

  • Purves RS, Clough P, Jones CB, Hall MH, Murdock V (2018) Geographic information retrieval: progress and challenges in spatial search of text. Found Trends Inf Retr 12(2–3):164–318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Randell DA, Cui Z, Cohn AG (1992) A spatial logic based on regions and connection. In: Nebel B, Rich C, Swartout WR (eds) Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on principles of knowledge representation and reasoning (KR’92). Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, pp 165–176

  • Ratti C, Sobolevsky S, Calabrese F, Andris C, Reades J, Martino M, Claxton R, Strogatz SH (2010) Redrawing the map of Great Britain from a network of human interactions. PLoS ONE 5:e14248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson VB (2000) Individual and multipersonal fuzzy spatial relations acquired using human-machine interaction. Fuzzy Sets Syst 113(1):133–145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rühli L (2012) Gemeindeautonomie zwischen Illusion und Realität: Gemeindestrukturen und Gemeindestrukturpolitik der Kantone. Kantonsmonitoring 4, Avenir Suisse, Zürich. https://www.avenir-suisse.ch/publication/kantonsmonitoring-4-gemeindeautonomie-zwischen-illusion-und-realitat/. Accessed 18 July 2019

  • Schockaert S, Cock MD, Kerre EE (2008) Location approximation for local search services using natural language hints. Int J Geograph Inf Sci 22(3):315–336

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schockaert S, Cock MD, Kerre EE (2009) Spatial reasoning in a fuzzy region connection calculus. Artif Intell 173(2):258–298

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schuler M, Dessemontet P, Joye D (2005) Eidgenössische Volkszählung 2000. Technical report, Bundesamt für Statistik, Neuenburg, Die Raumgliederungen der Schweiz, p 232

  • Skoumas G, Pfoser D, Kyrillidis A (2013) On quantifying qualitative geospatial data: a probabilistic approach. In: Proceedings of the second ACM SIGSPATIAL international workshop on crowdsourced and volunteered geographic information, GEOCROWD ’13. ACM, New York, pp 71–78

  • Wallgrün JO, Klippel A, Baldwin T (2014) Building a corpus of spatial relational expressions extracted from Web documents. In: Proceedings of the 8th workshop on geographic information retrieval, GIR 2014, Dallas/Fort Worth, TX, USA, November 4–7, 2014, pp 6:1–6:8

  • Williamson T (1994) Vagueness. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Worboys MF (1996) Metrics and topologies for geographic space. In: Kraak M, Molenaar M (eds) Advances in geographic information systems research II: Proceedings of the 7th international symposium on spatial data handling. Taylor and Francis, London, pp 365–376

    Google Scholar 

  • Worboys MF (2001) Nearness relations in environmental space. Int J Geograph Inf Sci 15(7):633–651

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yao X, Thill J-C (2005) How far is too far? A statistical approach to context-contingent proximity modeling. Trans GIS 9(2):157–178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yao X, Thill J-C (2007) Neurofuzzy modeling of context-contingent proximity relations. Geograph Anal 39(2):169–194

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

A special thanks to Professor Harold Boley, Ph.D., of the University of New Brunswick, NB, Canada, and Marc Novel of the Swiss Federal Research Institute WSL, Birmensdorf, and the University of Zurich for the extensive discussions of important aspects of this article. The help of Silvia Dingwall, Ph.D. in Applied Linguistics, with language editing is gratefully acknowledged. This research was funded by the Swiss Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Swiss Federal Research Institute WSL, Zürcherstrasse 111, 8903, Birmensdorf, Switzerland

    Rolf Grütter

Authors
  1. Rolf Grütter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rolf Grütter.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Grütter, R. A framework for assisted proximity analysis in feature data. J Geogr Syst 21, 367–394 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10109-019-00304-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10109-019-00304-3

Keywords

JEL Classification

Search

Navigation