Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Experts seem to find routes in complex environments by finding a connection from the source to a “skeleton” of major paths, then moving within the skeleton to the neighborhood of the destination, making a final connection to the destination. The authors present a computational hypothesis that describes the skeleton as emerging from the interaction of three factors: (a) The topological map is represented as a bipartite graph of places and paths, where a path is a one-dimensional ordered set of places; (b) a traveler incrementally accumulates topological relationships, including the relation of a place to a path serving as a dividing boundary separating two regions; and (c) the wayfinding algorithm prefers paths rich in boundary relations so they are likely to acquire more boundary relations. This positive-feedback loop leads to an oligarchy of paths rich in boundary relations. The authors present preliminary computational and empirical tests for this hypothesis, and provide initial results.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Chase, W. G. (1982). Spatial representations of taxi drivers. In D. R. Rogers & J. A. Sloboda (Eds.), Acquisition of symbolic skills. New York: Plenum.

Elliot, R. J., & Lesk, M. E. (1982). Route finding in street maps by computers and people. In Proceedings of the Second National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-82, pp. 258-261). Cambridge, MA: AAAI Press/MIT Press.

Golledge, R. G. (1999). Wayfinding behavior: Cognitive mapping and other spatial processes. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Kuipers, B. J. (1978). Modeling spatial knowledge. Cognitive Science, 2, 129-153.

Kuipers, B. J. (1982). The “map in the head” metaphor. Environment & Behavior, 14, 202-220.

Kuipers, B. J. (2000). The spatial semantic hierarchy. Artificial Intelligence, 119, 191-233.

Kuipers, B. (2001). The skeleton in the cognitive map: A computational hypothesis. In J. Peponis, J. Wineman, & S. Bafna (Eds.), Space syntax: Proceedings of the Third International Symposium (pp. 10.1-10.7). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.

Lynch, K. (1960). The image of the city. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Remolina, E., & Kuipers, B. (1998). Boundary region relations. In Cognitive robotics, papers from the 1998 AAAI fall symposium (AAAI Technical Report FS-98-02, pp. 117-124). Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press.

10.

Siegel, A. W., & White, S. H. (1975). The development of spatial representations of large-scale environments. In H. W. Reese (Ed.), Advances in child development and behavior (Vol. 10, pp. 9-55). San Diego: Academic Press.

11.

Timpf, S., Volta, G. S., Pollock, D. W., & Egenhofer, M. J. (1992). A conceptual model of wayfinding using multiple levels of abstraction. In A. U. Frank, I. Campari, & U. Formentini (Eds.), Theories and methods of spatio-temporal reasoning in geographic space (Vol. 639, pp. 348-367). New York/Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

The Skeleton In The Cognitive Map

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References