An inconsistency measure of spatial data sets with respect to topological constraints

References

• Baeza-Yates, R.A. and Ribeiro-Neto, B.A., 1999. Modern information retrieval. Boston, MA: Addison Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• Berreti, S., Bimbo, A.D., and Vicario, E., 2000. The computational aspect of retrieval by spatial arrangement. In: International conference on pattern recognition, 3 September 2000–7 September 2000 Barcelona. California, US: IEEE, vol. 1, 1047–1051. doi:10.1109/ICPR.2000.905651.
   Google Scholar
• Bonnissone, P. and Tong, R., 1985. Reasoning with uncertainty in expert systems. International Journal of Man and Machine Studies, 22, 241–250.
   Google Scholar
• Borges, K., Davis, C., and Laender, A., 2002. Integrity constraints in spatial databases. In: J.H. Doorn and L.C. Rivero, eds. Database integrity: challenges and solutions idea group. Hershey, PA: IGI Publishing, 144–171.
   Google Scholar
• Borges, K., Laender, A., and Davis, C., 1999. Spatial data integrity constraints in object oriented geographic data modeling. In: B. Medeiros, ed. Proceedings of the 7th ACM international symposium on Advances in geographic information systems (GIS ‘99), Claudia. New York, NY: ACM, 1–6. doi:10.1145/320134.320136.
   Google Scholar
• Bosc, P. and Prade, H., 1997. An introduction to fuzzy set and possibility theory based approaches to the treatment of uncertainty and imprecision in datatabase management systems. In: Uncertainty management in information systems: from needs to solutions. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 285–324.
   Google Scholar
• Bravo, L. and Rodríguez, M.A., 2012. Formalizing and reasoning about spatial semantic integrity constraints. Data & Knowledge Engineering, 72, 63–82.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brisaboa, N., Luaces, M., and Rodríguez, M.A., 2011. Cognitive adequacy of topological consistency measures. In: Advances in conceptual modeling. Recent developments and new directions – ER 2011 Workshops, Vol. 6999 of LNCS. Springer, 241–250.
   Google Scholar
• Douglas, D.H. and Peucker, T.K., 1973. Algorithms for the reduction of the number of points required to represent a digitized line or its caricature. Cartographica: The International Journal for Geographic Information and Geovisualization, 10 (2), 112–122.
   Google Scholar
• Egenhofer, M. and Al-Taha, K., 1992. Reasoning about gradual change of topological relationships. In: A.U. Frank, I. Campari and U. Formentini, eds. Theories and methods of spatio-temporal reasoning in geo-graphic space, LNCS 636, 21–23 September 1992 Pisa, Italy. vol. 639. Springer: Berlin Heidelberg.
   Google Scholar
• Egenhofer, M. and Franzosa, R., 1991. Point set topological relations. International Journal of Geographic Information Science, 5, 161–174.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Egenhofer, M. and Mark, D., 1995. Modeling conceptual neighborhoods of topological line-region relations. International Journal of Geographic Information Science, 9 (5), 555–565.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Egenhofer, M. and Shariff, A., 1998. Metric details for natural-language spatial relations. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 16 (4), 295–321.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Egenhofer, M.J. and Dube, M.P., 2009. Topological relations from metric refinements. In: ACM-GIS, 4–6 November 2009, Seattle, Washington. New York, NY, 158–167.
   Google Scholar
• Godoy, F.A. and Rodríguez, M.A., 2004. Defining and comparing content measures of topological relations. GeoInformatica, 8 (4), 347–371.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hadzilacos, T. and Tryfona, N., 1992. A model for expressing topological integrity constraints in geographic databases. In: A.U. Frank, I. Campari and U. Formentini, eds. Spatio-temporal reasoning, LNCS 639, 21–23 September 1992, Pisa, Italy. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 252–268.
   Google Scholar
• ISO, 2004. ISO 19125-1:2004 Geographic information – Simple feature access – Part 1: Common architecture. Technical report, International Organization for Standardization.
   Google Scholar
• Jiang, L., et al., 2009. Measuring and comparing effectiveness of data quality techniques. In: P. Eck, J. Gordijn and R. Wieringa, eds. Advanced information systems engineering, 21st international conference, CAiSE 2009, 8–12 June 2009, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 171–185.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, J. and Kwan, M.P., 2005. A combinatorial data model for representing topological relations among 3D geographical features in micro-spatial environments. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 19 (10), 1039–1056.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martinez, M.V., et al., 2007. How dirty is your relational database? An axiomatic approach. In: K. Mellouli, ed. Symbolic and quantitative approaches to reasoning with uncertainty, 9th European conference, ECSQARU 2007, Hammamet, Tunisia, 31 October–2 November 2007. Berlin: Springer, 103–114.
   Google Scholar
• Mäs, S., 2007. Reasoning on spatial semantic integrity constraints. In: S. Winter, M. Duckham, L. Kulik, and B. Kuipers, eds. COSIT, LNCS 4736, 19–23 September 2007 Melbourne, Australia. Berlin: Springer, 94–106. Springer, 285–302.
   Google Scholar
• Motro, A. and Rakov, I., 1996. Estimating the quality of data in relational databases. In: R.Y. Wang, ed. IQ MIT. Cambridge, MA: MIT Sloan School of Management, 94–106.
   Google Scholar
• OGC, 2011. OpenGIS Implementation standard for geographic information – simple feature access – Part 1: Common architecture. Technical report, Open Geospatial Consortium.
   Google Scholar
• Ordonez, C., García-García, J., and Chen, Z., 2007. Measuring referential integrity in distributed databases. In: Proceedings of the ACM first workshop on CyberInfrastructure: information management in eScience (CIMS ‘07). New York: ACM, 61–66.
   Google Scholar
• Papadias, D., Mamoulis, N., and Delis, V., 1998. Algorithms for querying spatial structure. In: B. Nebel, C. Rich and W.R. Swartou, eds. VLDB Conference, 25–29 October 1992, Cambridge, MA. 546–557.
   Google Scholar
• Parson, S., 1996. Current approaches to handling imperfect information in data and knowledge bases. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 8 (3), 353–371.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plümer, L. and Gröger, G., 1997. Achieving integrity constraints in geographic information systems. GeoInformatica, 1 (4), 345–367.
   Google Scholar
• Randell, D., Cui, Z., and Cohn, A., 1992. A spatial logic based on regions and connection. In: A. Gupta, O. Shmueli and J. Widom, eds. Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on knowledge representation and reasoning. 24–27 August 1998. New York: Morgan Kaufmann, 165–176.
   Google Scholar
• Rodríguez, M.A., Bertossi, L.E., and Marileo, M.C., 2013. Consistent query answering under spatial semantic constraints. Information Systems, 38 (2), 244–263.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodríguez, M.A., et al., 2010. Measuring consistency with respect to topological dependency constraints. In: 18th ACM SIGSPATIAL international symposium on advances in geographic information systems, 3–5 November 2010, San Jose, CA. New York: ACM, 182–191.
   Google Scholar
• Servigne, S., et al., 2000. A methodology for spatial consistency improvement of geographic databases. GeoInformatica, 4 (1), 7–34.
   Google Scholar
• Zlatanova, S., Rahman, A.A., and Shi, W., 2004. Topological models and frameworks for 3D spatial objects. Computers & Geosciences, 30 (4), 419–428.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar