Tearing down the walls: closing the gap between outdoor and indoor navigation

636 views
550 views

Published on

In the context of a growing dependence on positioning and navigational tools, a shift has taken place from solely outdoor applications to the indoor environment. Although location based services and indoor positioning techniques may have gotten increasing attention from a research and commercial point of view, ubiquitous indoor navigation systems are not yet available on the market. Currently, navigational applications are implemented either in micro indoor built environments (mostly within a specific context) or at a larger urban or regional scale outdoors. This strict separation of indoor and outdoor space not only exists in the used data and models, but also in the analytical tools and techniques. With people moving seamlessly from indoor to outdoor space, systems that integrate navigation in both will be the next challenge in navigational research. In our research, we contribute to this integration of indoor and outdoor space by studying its impact on present navigational applications. A review of various case studies in multiple route planners reveals several active problems regarding the use of the indoor-outdoor connection in pedestrian route calculations. The most stringent limitation of current route planners in this realm is the availability of accurate data of indoor infrastructures. This data should consist of network information, additional semantic enrichments and all entrance points. It appears that it is not feasible to gather and maintain accurate indoor data of all buildings in the coming years due to the enormous amount of data collection and maintenance. However, such a complete data gathering is not always necessary, since even small data enhancements, such as adding entrance and exit points of major infrastructure projects, can have a huge influence on pedestrian route calculations. A second major challenge in indoor navigation and route planning, appears to be the geocoding of the users input to a geographical location or spatial unit. With current geocoding methodologies only applied to outdoor applications, additional problems are induced for the indoor variant. For example the semi-uniformity in house numbers outdoors is completely non-existing indoors. Also, the necessary reference dataset in the address matching process is still not ubiquitously available due to a lack of indoor data. Above problems show that the immediate indoor-outdoor connection for navigation applications still has a long way to go. This research gives an overview of the requirements and current problems in navigational applications and as such fits in with the ongoing awareness of indoor and outdoor navigation.

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
636
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
11
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • First focus on availability and completeness in use of indoor data:Aim:Testwhether a route planner utilizes the indoor network structure in the shortest path calculationsquery to navigate in Brussels between 2 streets which are connected by a public galleryThe optimal pedestrian and shortest path route uses thisgallery with aboveground entrances in both streets.ResultsDifferences over the multiple route planners can be detected.Not all route planners use indoor infr. in SP calculations (Bing and Google Maps not)Bing doesn’t even recognize the gallery as part of the spatial dataset.In Google Maps the gallery is mapped with a text label, but is not part of the vector data available for routing.The other route planners map the optimal and shortest pedestrian route between departure and destination point with inclusion of indoor infrastructures.
  • Aim:A second example studies the use of an underground structure as part of a shortest path calculationquery in Myondong underground shopping centre (Seoul, Korea).cross street using the underground connector since this street is not directly crossable by pedestrians due to heavy traffic.need local data for the city centre of Seoul = only available through Google Maps and Naver (a Korean route planner).Shows the importance of geographical area of query in relation to commercial usage of route plannerResults:Huge difference in navigational instructions for both route planners.Google Maps: no routing info for pedestrians in SeoulNaver:very detailed information of the available pedestrian roads (recognition underground passage way with the corresponding entrance points and exit numbers).Both examples show:differences in data availability and use; no consistency in availabilitydifferences in LoD of the data that is available linked to geographical area of query, spatial data set completeness
  • Tearing down the walls: closing the gap between outdoor and indoor navigation

    1. 1. Tearing down the walls:closing the gap between outdoor and indoor navigation Ann Vanclooster - Philippe De Maeyer Department of Geography – CartoGIS cluster Ghent University Ann.Vanclooster@UGent.be October 12, 2011 Geomatics 2011 - Montréal
    2. 2. Outline• Applications for navigation• Research goal and assumptions• Route planner review: – Availability of indoor data – Indoor address matching• Product-to-market implications• Conclusion Tearing down the walls: closing the gap between outdoor and indoor navigationOct 12, 2011 2 Ann Vanclooster - Ann.Vanclooster@UGent.be
    3. 3. Applications for navigation• Variety of outdoor navigation systems• Efforts for indoor navigation – technological issues – indoor (3D) models• Focus on pedestrian navigation – specific requirements: context, environment, mode of locomotion, scale level – seamless movement between indoor and outdoor space Need to extend outdoor navigation systems to the indoor world! Tearing down the walls: closing the gap between outdoor and indoor navigationOct 12, 2011 3 Ann Vanclooster - Ann.Vanclooster@UGent.be
    4. 4. Research goal and assumptionsGoal:state of the art in integration of indoor infrastructures for navigation  based on what route planners doResources and assumptions:• ‘common’ outdoor route planners• indoor infrastructures• pedestrian navigation Route planner integration with 2 focuses: – How do they handle indoor data? – How are indoor addresses linked to spatial data? Tearing down the walls: closing the gap between outdoor and indoor navigationOct 12, 2011 4 Ann Vanclooster - Ann.Vanclooster@UGent.be
    5. 5. 1. Use of indoor data Indoor infrastructure part of the shortest pathBing Google Maps MappyVia Michelin RouteNet OpenRouteService Tearing down the walls: closing the gap between outdoor and indoor navigationOct 12, 2011 5 Ann Vanclooster - Ann.Vanclooster@UGent.be
    6. 6. 1. Use of indoor data Indoor infrastructure part of the shortest pathNaver Google Maps Differences in • data availability • level of detail of indoor data Tearing down the walls: closing the gap between outdoor and indoor navigationOct 12, 2011 6 Ann Vanclooster - Ann.Vanclooster@UGent.be
    7. 7. 1. Use of indoor data Availability of entrance informationBing Google Maps MappyVia Michelin RouteNet OpenRouteService Tearing down the walls: closing the gap between outdoor and indoor navigationOct 12, 2011 7 Ann Vanclooster - Ann.Vanclooster@UGent.be
    8. 8. 1. Use of indoor data Multimodal exampleNaver Google Maps Tearing down the walls: closing the gap between outdoor and indoor navigationOct 12, 2011 8 Ann Vanclooster - Ann.Vanclooster@UGent.be
    9. 9. 1. Use of indoor data Points learned• Mostly no incorporation of indoor infrastructures  Lack of available indoor data – Data gathering – Geographical area of the query – Commercial value• Available indoor data: differences in LoD• Underground structures• 3D indoor data Tearing down the walls: closing the gap between outdoor and indoor navigationOct 12, 2011 9 Ann Vanclooster - Ann.Vanclooster@UGent.be
    10. 10. 2. Indoor address matching On the same network edgeMappy Via Michelin RouteNet It is not possible to calculate the route because the route planner maps the departure and arrival locations on the same location. Tearing down the walls: closing the gap between outdoor and indoor navigationOct 12, 2011 10 Ann Vanclooster - Ann.Vanclooster@UGent.be
    11. 11. 2. Indoor address matching Influence on exit choiceBing Google Maps MappyVia Michelin OpenRouteService Tearing down the walls: closing the gap between outdoor and indoor navigationOct 12, 2011 11 Ann Vanclooster - Ann.Vanclooster@UGent.be
    12. 12. 2. Indoor address matching Points learnedBoth indoor and outdoor problem• Outdoor: suboptimal routing – link address to single exit/entrance point – not accounted for destination of query• Indoor: network information available – lineair interpolation on network  partly correct if on different edges – projection on outdoor network – unable to calculate Tearing down the walls: closing the gap between outdoor and indoor navigationOct 12, 2011 12 Ann Vanclooster - Ann.Vanclooster@UGent.be
    13. 13. Product-to-market implicationsIs it feasible to integrate indoor with outdoor navigation?3 focus points: 1) Data acquisition, standards and accuracy 2) Indoor geocoding challenges 3) Feasibility of integration Tearing down the walls: closing the gap between outdoor and indoor navigationOct 12, 2011 13 Ann Vanclooster - Ann.Vanclooster@UGent.be
    14. 14. Product-to-market implications Data acquisition, standards and accuracy• Current data sources: local and global providers commercially linked• Raw data acquisition: – no aerial images, mobile mapping – many existing internal data from various sources and applications – diversity in quality, coverage, structure, ... – no standard for indoor data (under development)• Network transformation: no mathematically sound framework Tearing down the walls: closing the gap between outdoor and indoor navigationOct 12, 2011 14 Ann Vanclooster - Ann.Vanclooster@UGent.be
    15. 15. Product-to-market implications Indoor geocoding challenges= assigning geographical coordinates to certain input source (e.g. postal addresses) • input source • reference data set (e.g. Tiger) Requirements • processing algorithm (e.g. linear interpolation) • required output • non-existing uniformity in indoor addressing Problems  different processing methodology • no appropriate and reliable reference data set Tearing down the walls: closing the gap between outdoor and indoor navigationOct 12, 2011 15 Ann Vanclooster - Ann.Vanclooster@UGent.be
    16. 16. Conclusion Feasibility of integration• No complete data gathering feasible – small data enhancements – focus on large, stable infrastructures – 3D aspect – public participation – existing indoor information• Improved geocoding methodologies• Full navigation system: positioning techniques Tearing down the walls: closing the gap between outdoor and indoor navigationOct 12, 2011 16 Ann Vanclooster - Ann.Vanclooster@UGent.be
    17. 17. Thank you for your attention Tearing down the walls: closing the gap between outdoor and indoor navigationOct 12, 2011 17 Ann Vanclooster - Ann.Vanclooster@UGent.be

    ×