1 / 29

Searching Trajectories by Locations – An Efficiency Study

Zaiben Chen 1 , Heng Tao Shen 1 , Xiaofang Zhou 1 , Yu Zheng 2 , Xing Xie 2 1 The University of Queensland 2 Microsoft Research, Asia. Searching Trajectories by Locations – An Efficiency Study. Outline. Research problem & application scenarios Basic ideas

laird
Download Presentation

Searching Trajectories by Locations – An Efficiency Study

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Zaiben Chen1, Heng Tao Shen1, Xiaofang Zhou1, Yu Zheng2, Xing Xie2 1 The University of Queensland 2 Microsoft Research, Asia Searching Trajectories by Locations – An Efficiency Study

  2. Outline • Research problem & application scenarios • Basic ideas • K Best-Connected Trajectory (k-BCT) query • The Incremental k-NN Algorithm (IKNN) • Performance study • Best-first • Depth-first • Optimization & extension • Experiments • Conclusion

  3. Research Problem: Searching Trajectory Databases How to retrieve the trajectories we want? GPS trajectories collected by GeoLife Project, MSRA

  4. Searching Trajectory Databases • Search by a location • Search by a sample trajectory Frentzos et al. Geoinfomatica07; Dfoser et al. VLDB00. (R-tree variants) Chen et al, SIGMOD05; Vlachos et al, ICDE02; Yi et al, ICDE98, etc. (Similarity)

  5. Searching Trajectory Databases • The problem we study: Searching by multiple locations • To find trajectories that are ‘close’ to all the locations • Technically, it is an extension of the single-location based query. But more complicated. • Practically, it produces a more general way to search trajectories. Two extreme cases (one location, many locations)

  6. Application motivations • The Microsoft GeoLife Project http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/projects/geolife/ GeoLife is a location-based service built on Microsoft Virtual Earth. Our work benefits the following two functions (1) Travel recommendation E.g. To help a visitor planning a trip to multiple attractions by considering other’s traveling trajectories. (2) Sharing life experiences & friend recommendation E.g. To find out which users share the similar daily route through Queens Plaza, Central Stat., Mains St.

  7. Application motivations Geo-Coding: From Pictures to Coordinates The recommended route

  8. Application motivations Geo-Coding: From Pictures to Coordinates The first step: to define the closeness (i.e. distance) between a trajectory and locations The recommended route

  9. Similarity Function • The similarity function reflects how close a trajectory is to the given locations, and we call the most similar trajectory the best-connected trajectory. • Step 1. find out the closest trajectory point on R to each location qi • Step 2. sum up the contribution of each matched pair. (unordered query) Distq(qi, R) is the shortest distance from qi to R Q={q1, q2, … qm}, R={p1, p2, … pn}

  10. Problem Definition • k-Best Connected Trajectory (k-BCT) query Given a set of trajectories T = {R1, R2, … , Rn}, a set of query locations Q = {q1, q2, … ,qm}, and the similarity function Sim(Q, R), the k-BCT query is to find the k trajectories among T that have the highest similarity. Assumption: The number of query locations is small. (m is a small constant) Intuition: The k-BCT result is the JOIN of m single-location based queries.

  11. Basic ideas Incremental k-NN Algorithm (IKNN) • Step 1. Index all the trajectory points by one single R-tree • Get the shortest distance from a query location to the trajectories • Step 2. Search for the λ-nearest neighbor (λ-NN) of each query location (q1 to qm), by using any traditional k-nearest neighbor algorithm over R-tree. For any trajectory that scanned by a λ-NN, it’s shortest distance to the query point is known. Candidate set C = {all scanned trajectories}

  12. IKNN algorithm • Step 3. Construct lower bounds of similarity. For a trajectory R1 in C, assume it got 3 points p1, p2 and p3 scanned by the λ-NN search of q1, q2. p5 R1 p1 p2 p3 q1 q2 q3 Sim(Q, R1) = e-|q1, p1| + e-|q2, p2| + e-|q3, p5| ≥ e-|q1, p1| + e-|q2, p2|

  13. The Incremental k-NN algorithm • Step 4. Construct upper bound of similarity. For any trajectory that is not covered by the λ-NN search, e.g. R5 it’s distance to qi must be larger than the radius of qi R1 radius1 radius2 radius3 q1 q2 q3 R5 Sim(Q, R5) = e-|q1, R5| + e-|q2, R5| + e-|q3, R5| ≤ e-radius1+ e-radius2 + e-radius3

  14. The Incremental k-NN algorithm • Step 5. Check the STOP condition (pruning condition) For a k-BCT query, if we can get k candidate trajectories whose lower bounds are not less than the upper bound of similarity for all un-scanned trajectories, then the k best-connected trajectories must be included in the candidate set. if the condition is satisfied go to the refinement step else increase λ by some Δ repeat the search process With the search region of the λ-NN search enlarges, eventually k best-connected trajectories will be found.

  15. Problem • The problem: we may need to increase λ and compute the lower/upper bounds for many rounds before we eventually find the k-BCT results. • The λ-NN search will run for many rounds for every query location. (let λ be a constant k initially, and Δ be k as well) round 1: 1 – k nearest neighbors round 2: 1 – 2k nearest neighbors … round i: 1 – i*k nearest neighbors Trajectory points are visited multiple times. Normally, λ >> k, so the complexity is λ^2.

  16. Problem • The problem: we may need to increase λ and compute the lower/upper bounds for many rounds before we eventually find the k-BCT results. • The λ-NN search will run for many rounds for every query location. (let λ be a constant k initially, and Δ be k as well) round 1: 1 – k nearest neighbors round 2: 1 – 2k nearest neighbors … round i: 1 – i*k nearest neighbors Normally, λ >> k, so the complexity is lambda square. Can we reduce the overlapped search regions?

  17. Efficiency study of the IKNN • Adaption of the λ-NN algorithm • The best-first nearest neighbor search [Hjaltason et al., TODS99] A priority queue is maintained to store all the R-tree entries that have yet to be visited, using the MINDIST as a key. So it visits MBRs/Objects in the order of the MINDIST. • The depth-first nearest neighbor search [Roussopoulos et al., SIGMOD95] It recursively traverses the R-tree level by level in a depth-first manner, while maintaining a global list of k nearest candidates found so far. • Estimate the performance of the IKNN adopting different λ-NN algorithms

  18. Adaption of the λ-NN algorithm • The best-first NN search • Retrieve the λ, λ+∆, λ+2∆, … NN for each query location incrementally until the k best-connected trajectories are included in the candidate set. • Benefit The λ-NN is returned in an incremental way I/O optimal, no overlap occurs, Vsum = λ • Shortcoming Memory consumption is NOT guaranteed. A priority queue is maintained to store all the R-tree entries that have yet to be visited. The queue may be as large as the whole dataset in an extreme case.

  19. The best-first strategy • Performance (R-tree leaf access) • Estimate the circle region (with radius r) that contains λ points [Belussi et al. VLDB95] • Estimate the leaf access of a range query with radius r [Korn et al. TKDE2001] • m independent λ-NN queries λ objects q radius

  20. Adaption of the lambda-NN algorithm • The depth-first NN search • Every time we search for the λ+∆ NN, we have to re-visit the search region of the λ-NN query. • Benefit: Guaranteed memory usage, O(c LogcN) • Drawback: Too many overlaps • A simple improvement: Double λ at each round, to reduce the number of rounds and amortize cost. • Pruning: All MBRs whose MAXDIST is even smaller than the current search range of λ-NN can be skipped in the search of λ+∆ NN.

  21. The depth-first strategy • Performance (R-tree leaf access) The search region is not necessary a circle! So we can not use the previous method directly. • Estimate the size of the first visited MBR (at any level) that contains not less than λ points • Estimate the radius (MAXDIST) of the region that contains the MBR MBR1 MAXDIST qi R-tree nodes outside the circle with radius MAXDIST wont be visited.

  22. The depth-first strategy (cont.) • Performance • Estimate the leaf access of a range query with radius MAXDIST [Korn et al. TKDE2001] • Finally,

  23. Summary The best-first strategy, although has no guarantee in memory usage, it normally runs faster and the priority queue can still be accommodated in the main memory of a modern computer easily. The modified depth-first strategy reaches nearly the same performance as that of the best-first strategy, while it still preserves a low memory consumption

  24. Optimization & Extension • Considering the importance of the query locations and assigning different weights in exploring objects. • Extension to query locations with an order specified

  25. Experiments • 12, 653 trajectories (1,147,116 points) collected by the Geolife project • Number of query locations: 2 to 10 • Tests are conducted on PC with 2.1GHz CPU and 1GB memory

  26. Experiments – Node Access

  27. Experiments – Query Time

  28. Experiments – Memory Usage

  29. Thank you

More Related