The Analysis of Chosen Generalization Methods

1. SC of Geoinformatics Institute of Geodesy and Geoinformatics Wrocław University of Environmental and Life Sciences Wrocław, 27th May 2008 TheAnalysis of ChosenGeneralizationMethods Krzysztof Sośnica krzysztof.sosnica@gmail.com

2. Krzysztof Sośnica SC of Geoinformatics Wrocław U of E and LS TheAnalysis of ChosenGeneralizationMethods Cartographicalreefs Introduction Sonoric digitizer Generalization methods Cartographyprojection Sonoric generalization Terrainelevation Characteristic of method Results Generalization Summary Bibliography

3. Krzysztof Sośnica SC of Geoinformatics Wrocław U of E and LS TheAnalysis of ChosenGeneralizationMethods Generalization Introduction Sonoric digitizer Cartographic generalization is the process of selecting and representing information of a map in a way that adapts to the scale of the display medium of the map. In this way, every map has, to some extent, been generalized to match the criteria of display. This includes small-scale maps, which cannot convey every detail of the real world. Cartographers must decide and then adjust the content within their maps to create a suitable and useful map that conveys geospatial information within their representation of the world. Generalization is not a process that only removes and selects data, but also a process that simplifies it as well. Simplification is a technique where shapes of retained features are altered to enhance visibility and reduce complexity. Generalization methods Sonoric generalization Characteristic of method Results Summary Bibliography

4. Krzysztof Sośnica SC of Geoinformatics Wrocław U of E and LS TheAnalysis of ChosenGeneralizationMethods Simplification Introduction Sonoric digitizer Generalization methods Sonoric generalization Characteristic of method Results Summary Bibliography

5. Krzysztof Sośnica SC of Geoinformatics Wrocław U of E and LS TheAnalysis of ChosenGeneralizationMethods Sonoricmethod Introduction Sonoric digitizer Generalization methods Sonoric generalization Characteristic of method Results The method of sonoric code as well as the device was created and developed by Ewa Krzywicka-Blum and Janusz Kuchmister. This method assumes connecting auditory and kinaesthetic senses. It allows to develop the educational aids by adding drawings, maps, graphs or schemata, which are altered from simplified graphic form into sound. Summary Bibliography

6. Krzysztof Sośnica SC of Geoinformatics Wrocław U of E and LS TheAnalysis of ChosenGeneralizationMethods Introduction Sonoric digitizer Generalization methods Sonoric generalization Characteristic of method Results Summary Bibliography 1 – Operating plate, 5. – Horizontal axis, 18. Indicator, 25 – Vertical axis, 36. Headphones, 38. Discslot, 41. Controling and registering system,

7. Krzysztof Sośnica SC of Geoinformatics Wrocław U of E and LS TheAnalysis of ChosenGeneralizationMethods Introduction Sonoric digitizer Generalization methods Sonoric generalization Characteristic of method Results Fig. 1. The operational field of the sonic digitizer Summary Similarly to the two linear Cartesian co-ordinates locating point belonging to a graphical scene, two characteristics of a signal – the frequency along vertical direction and the volume, in relation to the horizontal move of pointer in the operational area, have been chosen. Bibliography

8. Krzysztof Sośnica SC of Geoinformatics Wrocław U of E and LS TheAnalysis of ChosenGeneralizationMethods Introduction Sonoric digitizer Generalization methods Sonoric generalization The blind working with the sonic digitizer Characteristic of method Decoding of the elements of the scenes may be performed in three different versions: 1) A teacher decodes the scene themselves, moving the detector in the operation area, while a pupil hears out the sounds in the phones, 2) A teacher and a pupil decode the scene together (pupil’s and teacher’s hands together move the detector in the operation area) while the pupil hears out the sounds in the phones, 3) The pupil decodes the contents of the scene unaided, steering the movement of the detector in the operation area and simultaneously hearing out the sounds in the phones. Results Summary Bibliography Source: 9, Krzywicka-Blum, Kuchmister, 1999

9. Krzysztof Sośnica SC of Geoinformatics Wrocław U of E and LS TheAnalysis of ChosenGeneralizationMethods Example - rectangle Introduction Sonoric digitizer Generalization methods Sonoric generalization Characteristic of method Results Summary Bibliography

10. Krzysztof Sośnica SC of Geoinformatics Wrocław U of E and LS TheAnalysis of ChosenGeneralizationMethods SecondExample Introduction Sonoric digitizer Generalization methods Sonoric generalization Characteristic of method Results Summary Bibliography

11. Krzysztof Sośnica SC of Geoinformatics Wrocław U of E and LS TheAnalysis of ChosenGeneralizationMethods Example - Poland Introduction Sonoric digitizer Generalization methods Sonoric generalization Characteristic of method Results Summary Bibliography

12. Krzysztof Sośnica SC of Geoinformatics Wrocław U of E and LS TheAnalysis of ChosenGeneralizationMethods Introduction Sonoric digitizer Generalization methods Sonoric generalization Characteristic of method Results Summary Bibliography

13. Krzysztof Sośnica SC of Geoinformatics Wrocław U of E and LS TheAnalysis of ChosenGeneralizationMethods Tobler’sGeneralization Introduction Sonoric digitizer Eliminating of points without including into consideration the topology. Generalization methods Sonoric generalization Characteristic of method Results Summary Bibliography

14. Krzysztof Sośnica SC of Geoinformatics Wrocław U of E and LS TheAnalysis of ChosenGeneralizationMethods Tobler’sGeneralization Introduction Sonoric digitizer Result of generalization: Generalization methods Sonoric generalization Characteristic of method Egypt – originalcontour– 58 points Results Egypt – aftersimplification– 27 points Summary • Similar areas; • - Center of gravity is kept; • Decomposition of points is regular; Bibliography

15. Krzysztof Sośnica SC of Geoinformatics Wrocław U of E and LS TheAnalysis of ChosenGeneralizationMethods Jenk’sgeneralization: Introduction Sonoric digitizer Eliminating points which can be treated as reclinig on the contour line (which distance from the straight line is less than the allowed distance). Generalization methods Sonoric generalization Characteristic of method Results Summary Bibliography

16. Krzysztof Sośnica SC of Geoinformatics Wrocław U of E and LS TheAnalysis of ChosenGeneralizationMethods Jenk’sgeneralization: Introduction Result of generalization: Sonoric digitizer Generalization methods Sonoric generalization Characteristic of method Egypt – originalcontour– 58 points Egypt – aftersimplification– 27 points Results Summary • - Areas are kept; • - Perimeters are kept; • - Centres of gravity are kept; • Decomposition of points is irregular; Bibliography

17. Krzysztof Sośnica SC of Geoinformatics Wrocław U of E and LS TheAnalysis of ChosenGeneralizationMethods Jenk’s and Tobbler’sgeneralization: Introduction Result of combinedgeneralization: Sonoric digitizer Generalization methods Sonoric generalization Characteristic of method Results Egypt – originalcontour– 58 points Egypt – aftersimplification– 12 points Summary Bibliography Area change -0,35%

18. Krzysztof Sośnica SC of Geoinformatics Wrocław U of E and LS TheAnalysis of ChosenGeneralizationMethods Lang’sgeneralization: Introduction Sonoric digitizer • This algorithm demands two parameters: • amount of „front points” (n) during examination; • - Parameter of tolleration (t) Generalization methods Sonoric generalization Characteristic of method Results Summary Bibliography

19. Krzysztof Sośnica SC of Geoinformatics Wrocław U of E and LS TheAnalysis of ChosenGeneralizationMethods Lang’sgeneralization: Introduction Sonoric digitizer Generalization methods Sonoric generalization Characteristic of method Results Original - Croatia (653) Croatia after simplification(36) Summary -areas of objects are kept -large reduction of points; -shape of object is quite good kept Bibliography

20. Krzysztof Sośnica SC of Geoinformatics Wrocław U of E and LS TheAnalysis of ChosenGeneralizationMethods Chrobak’sgeneralization: Introduction Sonoric digitizer In this method hierarchy of points as well as topology are kept. In the first step we choose the constant points, which shall not be removed, then (the second step) we create new points on the contour line. Generalization methods Sonoric generalization Characteristic of method Results Summary Bibliography

21. Krzysztof Sośnica SC of Geoinformatics Wrocław U of E and LS TheAnalysis of ChosenGeneralizationMethods Chrobak’sgeneralization: Introduction Sonoric digitizer Generalization methods Sonoric generalization Characteristic of method Results Original – Croatia (653) After simplification (22) Summary • Particular large amounts of iterations; • Shape of objects are kept; • Areas are kept Bibliography

22. Krzysztof Sośnica SC of Geoinformatics Wrocław U of E and LS TheAnalysis of ChosenGeneralizationMethods Sonoricgeneralization: Introduction Sonoric digitizer Generalization methods Possible directions: Sonoric generalization Characteristic of method Results Summary Bibliography

23. Krzysztof Sośnica SC of Geoinformatics Wrocław U of E and LS TheAnalysis of ChosenGeneralizationMethods Sonoricgeneralization: Introduction Sonoric digitizer Generalization methods Sonoric generalization Characteristic of method Results Summary Original - Croatia (653) Croatia after sonoric generalization(53) Bibliography

24. Krzysztof Sośnica SC of Geoinformatics Wrocław U of E and LS TheAnalysis of ChosenGeneralizationMethods GeneralizationinOrffe’sscale: Introduction Sonoric digitizer Generalization methods Sonoric generalization Characteristic of method Results Summary Bibliography

25. Krzysztof Sośnica SC of Geoinformatics Wrocław U of E and LS TheAnalysis of ChosenGeneralizationMethods Shaperatios Introduction Sonoric digitizer Shape ratios are mathematic equations which describes the geometrical shape of contours. They can be used as an objective indicators for characteristic the shape. Generalization methods Sonoric generalization Examples: Characteristic of method S – area Results Summary L – perimeter Bibliography

26. Krzysztof Sośnica SC of Geoinformatics Wrocław U of E and LS TheAnalysis of ChosenGeneralizationMethods Introduction Sonoric digitizer Generalization methods Sonoric generalization Original(745) Tobler’s generalization(34) Characteristic of method Results Summary Bibliography Jenk’s generalization (86) Lang’s generalization (36)

27. Krzysztof Sośnica SC of Geoinformatics Wrocław U of E and LS TheAnalysis of ChosenGeneralizationMethods Introduction Sonoric digitizer Generalization methods Sonoric generalization Original (745) Sonoric generalization(32) Characteristic of method Results Summary Bibliography Sonoric generalization(22) Chrobak’s generalization(34)

28. Krzysztof Sośnica SC of Geoinformatics Wrocław U of E and LS TheAnalysis of ChosenGeneralizationMethods Introduction Sonoric digitizer Generalization methods Sonoric generalization Characteristic of method Results Original(745) Summary Bibliography in Orffe’s scale (54)

29. Krzysztof Sośnica SC of Geoinformatics Wrocław U of E and LS TheAnalysis of ChosenGeneralizationMethods Introduction Sonoric digitizer Generalization methods Sonoric generalization Chrobak’s generalization(34) Lang’s generalization(36) Characteristic of method Results Summary Bibliography

30. Krzysztof Sośnica SC of Geoinformatics Wrocław U of E and LS TheAnalysis of ChosenGeneralizationMethods Introduction Sonoric digitizer • Results: • Itispossible to usevarioussimplificationalgorithms for generalizationthecontour lines, • Thebestresultsareachieved by theLang’smethod (velocity) and by Chrobak’smethod (accuracy). Generalization methods Sonoric generalization Characteristic of method Results Summary Bibliography

31. Krzysztof Sośnica SC of Geoinformatics Wrocław U of E and LS TheAnalysis of ChosenGeneralizationMethods Bibliography Introduction Sonoric digitizer 1. Klimczak H., 2003: „Modelowanie kartograficzne w badanaiach rozmieszczenia zjawisk przestrzennych”, Wydawnictwo AR we Wrocławiu, Wrocław 2003 2. Krzywicka-Blum E., 1998; „Sonoryczne uwarunkowania kodowania punktów”, Zesz. Nauk. AR we Wrocławiu, S. Geodezja i Kartografia Nr 343, str. 139-134, Wrocław 3. Kuchmister J., 1998: „Analiza dokładności pozycjonowania punktów w polu operacyjnym digitizera sonorycznego”, Zesz. Nauk. AR we Wrocławiu, S. Geodezja i Kartografia Nr 343, str. 181-190, Wrocław, Polska 4. Krzywicka-Blum E , Kuchmister J., 1999, monografia, str. 100, Kat. Geod. i Fot. AR, Wrocław, Polska 5. Krzywicka–Blum E., Kuchmister J., 2005, „Rola sekwencji sygnałów sonorycznych w tworzeniu wyobrażeń przestrzennych osób niewidomych”, Fizjoterapia t 13, Nr 2 str. 33–39, Wrocław 6. Ćmielewski K. Krzywicka–Blum E., Kuchmister J, Parol M., 2005, „Urządzenie do odtwarzania testów sonorycznych”, Patent UPRP Nr 189881, Polska 7. Bubliński Z. Cetnarowicz K. : „Zastosowanie elementu składowego do przetwarzania obrazów optycznych”, Tom 10, zeszyt 1, 1991 8. Krzywicka-Blum E.,Kuchmister J. „Thesoundcodingmethod as an educationalaid for theblind” 9. Krzywicka-Blum E., Kuchmister J. „Thesonicmodellinginblindpeopleeducation” 10. Chrobak T. „Automatyzacja procesu generalizacji kartograficznej i jej wyników prezentowanych na mapie”, 2006 AGH Kraków Generalization methods Sonoric generalization Characteristic of method Results Summary Bibliography

32. SC of Geoinformatics Institute of Geodesy and Geoinformatics Wrocław University of Environmental and Life Sciences Wrocław, 27th May 2008 Thankyou for yourattention Krzysztof Sośnica krzysztof.sosnica@gmail.com