Argumentation Mapping in Collaborative Spatial Decision Making

Author(s):  
Claus Rinner

Collaboration and decision-making of humans usually entails logical reasoning that is expressed through discussions and individual arguments. Where collaborative work uses geospatial information and where decision-making has a spatial connotation, argumentation will include geographical references. Argumentation maps have been developed to support geographically referenced discussions, and provide a visual access to debates in domains such as urban planning. The concept of argumentation maps provides for explicit links between arguments and the geographic objects they refer to. These geo-argumentative relations do not only allow for cartographic representation of arguments, but also support the querying of both space and discussion. Combinations of spatial queries and retrieval of linked arguments provide a powerful way of analyzing and summarizing the current state of a debate. In this chapter, we provide an overview of the original argumentation model, and we discuss related research and application development. We also link argumentation mapping to related concepts in geographic visualization, spatial decision support systems, and public participation GIS under the umbrella of collaborative GIS.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claus Rinner

Collaboration and decision-making of humans usually entails logical reasoning that is expressed through discussions and individual arguments. Where collaborative work uses geo-spatial information and where decision-making has a spatial connotation, argumentation will include geographical references. Argumentation maps have been developed to support geographically referenced discussions and provide a visual access to debates in domains such as urban planning. The concept of argumentation maps provides for explicit links between arguments and the geographic objects they refer to. These geo-argumentative relations do not only allow for cartographic representation of arguments, but also support the querying of both, space and discussion. Combinations of spatial queries and retrieval of linked arguments provide a powerful way of analyzing and summarizing the current state of a debate. In this chapter, we provide an overview of the original argumentation model and we discuss related research and application development. We also link argumentation mapping to related concepts in geographic visualization, spatial decision support systems, and public participation GIS under the umbrella of collaborative GIS.


Complexity ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 ◽  
pp. 1-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jing Geng ◽  
Shuliang Wang ◽  
Wenxia Gan ◽  
Hanning Yuan ◽  
Zeqiang Chen ◽  
...  

With the development of geoscience, users are eager to obtain preferred service from geospatial information intelligently and automatically. However, the information grows rapidly while the service gets more complicated, which makes it difficult to find out the targeted information for an exact service in geospatial issues. In this paper, a novel method is proposed to promote the geospatial service from information to knowledge with spatiotemporal semantics. Both prompted and professional knowledge are further refined to be published as a service. In terms of an exact task, numerous related services are recombined to a service chain under user requirement. Finally, the proposed method is applied to monitor the environment on the Air Quality Index (AQI) and soil moisture (SM) in the Sensor Web service platform, the results of which indicate geospatial knowledge service (GKS) is more efficient to support spatial decision-making.


2011 ◽  
pp. 614-636
Author(s):  
Shan Gao ◽  
David Sundaram

Spatial decision-making is a key aspect of human behaviour. Spatial decision support systems support spatial decision-making processes by integrating required information, tools, models and technology in a user-friendly manner. While current spatial decision support systems fulfil their specific objectives, they fail to address many of the requirements for effective spatial problem solving, as they are inflexible, complex to use and often domain-specific. This research blends together several relevant disciplines to overcome the problems identified in various areas of spatial decision support. We proposed a generic spatial decision-making process and a domain-independent spatial decision support system (SDSS) framework and architecture to support the process. We also developed a flexible SDSS to demonstrate an environment in which decision makers can utilize various tools and explore different scenarios to derive a decision. The use of the system is demonstrated in a number of real scenarios across location, allocation, routing, layout, and spatio-temporal problems.


2010 ◽  
pp. 532-555
Author(s):  
Shan Gao ◽  
David Sundaram

Spatial decision-making is a key aspect of human behaviour. Spatial decision support systems support spatial decision-making processes by integrating required information, tools, models and technology in a user-friendly manner. While current spatial decision support systems fulfil their specific objectives, they fail to address many of the requirements for effective spatial problem solving, as they are inflexible, complex to use and often domain-specific. This research blends together several relevant disciplines to overcome the problems identified in various areas of spatial decision support. We proposed a generic spatial decision-making process and a domain-independent spatial decision support system (SDSS) framework and architecture to support the process. We also developed a flexible SDSS to demonstrate an environment in which decision makers can utilize various tools and explore different scenarios to derive a decision. The use of the system is demonstrated in a number of real scenarios across location, allocation, routing, layout, and spatio-temporal problems.


Author(s):  
Shan Gao ◽  
David Sundaram

Spatial decision-making is a key aspect of human behaviour. Spatial decision support systems support spatial decision-making processes by integrating required information, tools, models and technology in a user-friendly manner. While current spatial decision support systems fulfil their specific objectives, they fail to address many of the requirements for effective spatial problem solving, as they are inflexible, complex to use and often domain-specific. This research blends together several relevant disciplines to overcome the problems identified in various areas of spatial decision support. We proposed a generic spatial decision-making process and a domain-independent spatial decision support system (SDSS) framework and architecture to support the process. We also developed a flexible SDSS to demonstrate an environment in which decision makers can utilize various tools and explore different scenarios to derive a decision. The use of the system is demonstrated in a number of real scenarios across location, allocation, routing, layout, and spatio-temporal problems.


2000 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 197-206 ◽  
Author(s):  
Piotr Jankowski

This paper presents the results of an experimental study about the use of collaborative spatial decision support tools to aid environmental restoration management and decision making. Similar, but non-geographic tools were developed and successfully applied in the 1990s for the computerised support of group decision making aimed at solving business problems. Yet, there are significant differences between business applications and spatial applications including environmental management. These differences motivated the study of habitat restoration reported in this paper. The results demonstrate that maps—the most common representation structures of spatial data in geographic information systems—play only a limited support role. Development of new ways to visualise spatial information and novel integrations of maps with analytical tools including multiple criteria decision models may help develop more effective collaborative spatial decision support systems.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claus Rinner

This paper proposes to use principles of geographic visualization in conjunction with multi‐criteria evaluation methods to support expert‐level spatial decision‐making. Interactive maps can be combined with analytical tools to explore various settings of multi‐criteria evaluation parameters that define different decision‐making strategies. In a case study, the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is used to calculate composite measures of urban quality of life (QoL) for neighbourhoods in Toronto. The AHP allows for an interactive exploration of decision‐making strategies, while offering a view on spatial patterns in the evaluation results. In particular, an interactive blending between a classical and a contemporary QoL model is supported. This feature is used in a pilot study to assess the usefulness of geographic visualization in urban QoL evaluation. Three user interviews provide positive feedback on the utility and usability of the tool that was operated by the investigator.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claus Rinner

This paper proposes to use principles of geographic visualization in conjunction with multi‐criteria evaluation methods to support expert‐level spatial decision‐making. Interactive maps can be combined with analytical tools to explore various settings of multi‐criteria evaluation parameters that define different decision‐making strategies. In a case study, the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is used to calculate composite measures of urban quality of life (QoL) for neighbourhoods in Toronto. The AHP allows for an interactive exploration of decision‐making strategies, while offering a view on spatial patterns in the evaluation results. In particular, an interactive blending between a classical and a contemporary QoL model is supported. This feature is used in a pilot study to assess the usefulness of geographic visualization in urban QoL evaluation. Three user interviews provide positive feedback on the utility and usability of the tool that was operated by the investigator.


Author(s):  
S. Raza Wasi ◽  
J. Darren Bender

An interesting, potentially useful, and fully replicable application of a spatially enabled decision model is presented for pipeline route optimization. This paper models the pipeline route optimization problem as a function of engineering and environmental design criteria. The engineering requirements mostly deal with capital, operational and maintenance costs, whereas environmental considerations ensure preservation of nature, natural resources and social integration. Typically, pipelines are routed in straight lines, to the extent possible, to minimize the capital construction costs. In contrast, longer pipelines and relatively higher costs may occur when environmental and social considerations are part of the design criteria. Similarly, much longer pipelines are less attractive in terms of capital costs and the environmental hazard associated with longer construction area. The pipeline route optimization problem is potentially a complex decision that is most often undertaken in an unstructured, qualitative fashion based on human experience and judgement. However, quantitative methods such as spatial analytical techniques, particularly the least-cost path algorithms, have greatly facilitated automation of the pipeline routing process. In the past several interesting studies have been conducted using quantitative spatial analytical tools for finding the best pipeline route or using non-spatial decision making tools to evaluate several alternates derived through conventional route reconnaissance methods. Most of these studies (that the authors are familiar with) have concentrated on integrating multiple sources of spatial data and performing quantitative least-cost path analysis or have attempted to make use of non-spatial decision making tools to select the best route. In this paper, the authors present a new framework that incorporates quantitative spatial analytical tools with an Analytical Hierarchical Process (AHP) model to provide a loosely integrated but efficient spatial Decision Support System (DSS). Specifically, the goal is to introduce a fully replicable spatial DSS that processes both quantitative and qualitative information, balances between lowest-cost and lowest-impact routes. The model presented in this paper is implemented in a four step process: first, integration of multiple source data that provide basis for engineering and environmental design criteria; second, creation of several alternate routes; third, building a comprehensive decision matrix using spatial analysis techniques; and fourth, testing the alternative and opinions of the stakeholder groups on imperatives of AHP model to simplify the route optimization decision. The final output of the model is then used to carry out sensitivity analysis, quantify the risk, generate “several what and if scenarios” and test stability of the route optimization decision.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document