Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
3B_4_Rate-my-place
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

3B_4_Rate-my-place

867
views

Published on


0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
867
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Rate my place: a social network application for crowd- sourcing vernacular geographic areas Julian Rosser and Jeremy Morley Centre for Geospatial Science, University of Nottingham GISRUK - 15 th April, 2010
  • 2. Presentation outline
    • Background
    • Project concept
    • Implementation
    • Demonstration video
    • Pilot application results
    • Conclusions and further work
  • 3. Background
    • Vernacular geography refers to the vague boundaries and informal place names of locations used by people on an everyday basis
    • Places can be unofficial or perceived differently
    • Places like: the North, town centre, downtown, Bloomsbury, West End, Soho
    • Locations more prototypical than others
    • (Montello et al. 2003)
    Definitely NOT the West End Definitely the West End
  • 4. Background
    • People’s geographic perceptions and opinions also vary between individuals
    LondonLeben, 2004.
  • 5. Background
    • Why is this important?
      • Improve system functionality interpreting vagueness :
        • Geographic Information Retrieval (GIR)
        • Ontologies and semantics - naïve, non-experts
        • Usability - more natural user interaction
    • Need a way to capture vernacular areas on a wide scale
    • Sketch map surveys are labour intensive
    • - automated methods
    • (e.g. Arampatzis, et al. 2006)
    • A web 2.0 mapping tool to elicit perceptions
  • 6. Project concept
    • Rate my place Facebook application:
      • User focused on rating areas
      • Spray can to mark vague geographic extents
      • User associates a place name to the extent
      • View an average rating map
    • Ratings – “love”, “like”, “dislike” or “hate”
    • Data collection outcomes:
      • Vernacular dataset of perceived areas
      • Rating map of areas
    • Individual perceptions later aggregated to generate a collaborative definition of place
  • 7. Implementation – base mapping
    • Levels of base mapping detail influence perceptions
    • ‘Hybrid’ style maps offer aerial photography which should help users orient themselves.
    Google maps Microsoft (Bing) maps Google Maps Bing Maps
  • 8. Implementation – Interface mechanisms
    • Two possible spray types
    • Dither Gaussian-like
    • Do user’s prefer a particular spray type?
    • Does one type capture their perception better than the other?
    • Usability – social network users require applications to be fun and enjoyable ( Hart et al. 2008).
  • 9. Implementation – technologies
    • Interface – Google Maps
          • Adobe Flash
    • Server – Rating surface raster
          • PHP
          • GDAL (Geospatial Data Abstraction Library)
          • Python
    • Database – MySQL stores each individual spray
    • Use individual sprays to define collaboratively defined areas
  • 10. Implementation – demo
  • 11. Pilot application results
    • Prototype system ran online for ~5 days
    • Users were asked to rate areas of London
      • 24 users submitted 127 areas
    • 78% found the system
    • simple to use
    • 61% found the system
    • fun to use
    • 65% were happy with
    • the cartography
  • 12. Pilot application results
    • 5 individuals tagged a place as “soho”:
  • 13. Conclusions & Future work
    • A large dataset of vernacular areas can be produced
      • The more contributions the better
    • Data gaps will always exist – areas ignored which are not interesting to Facebook users
      • Integration with other vernacular data sources
    • Users may group multiple areas to one place name
    • Users rating may also influence boundary size
    • Gaussian distribution is not directly controlled by the user
  • 14. Conclusions & Future work
    • Effect of user’s context needs further exploration
      • Mining social network profile
      • User’s location and personal interests
    • Spray extent combination and identification of areas with a significant level agreement
    • Compare with an official gazetteer or boundary datasets - quantification of differences to general perception
  • 15. References
    • Arampatzis, A., Van Kreveld, M., Reinbacher, I., Jones, C., Vaid, S., Clough, P, Joho, H. & Sanderson, M. 2006, Web-based delineation of imprecise regions. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems. 30, pp. 436–459.
    • Flickr Shapefiles. 2009. http://code.flickr.com/blog/2009/05/21/flickr-shapefiles-public-dataset-10/
    • Hart, J., Ridley, C., Taher, F., Sas, C. & Dix, A. 2008. Exploring the Facebook Experience: A New Approach to Usability. Proceedings of the 5th Nordic conference on Human-computer interaction: building bridges, October 20-22, 2008, Lund, Sweden. Pp. 471-474.
    • LondonLeben, 2004. Mapping London. The real map of London as North Londoners know it. Available from: http://www.londonleben.co.uk/northlondonersview.pdf
    • Montello, D. R., Goodchild, M. F., Gottsegen, J., and Fohl, P. 2003. Where's downtown?: Behavioral methods for determining referents of vague spatial queries. Spatial Cognition & Computation. 3(2):185-204. P.201.
  • 16. Summary
    • Rate-my-place is now online in Facebook. Please submit
    • your opinions and spread the word...
    • http://apps.facebook.com/rate_my_place

×