Examines conceptual neighborhood graphs, focusing on data variability in crowdsourced and volunteered geographic information, implying potential enhancements in data analytics.
The big data revolution transformed how we think of data analytics in many ways. Critical amongst them are the somewhat interconnected ideas of volunteered geographic information, crowdsourcing, and the big data property of variety. The robust literature concerning conceptual neighborhood graphs in two of these cases considers objects whose datatypes are held stable between the relations under consideration. This, however, is a limiting factor in these three application spaces due to the unknown form that data will take. This paper considers two avenues for the conceptual neighborhood graph to take as directions to address current complications facing reasoning tasks within a practically dirty world motivated by various sources of data: discretization conceptual neighborhood graphs (changing between corresponding vector and raster spaces) and cartographic generalization conceptual neighborhood graphs (changing the form of the objects in question). This paper provides insights as to what considerations should be considered when embarking upon this idea and demonstrates these concepts applied to prior conceptual neighborhood graphs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dube et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: