Skip to main content

The Effect of Regional Variation and Resolution on Geosocial Thematic Signatures for Points of Interest

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Societal Geo-innovation (AGILE 2017)

Abstract

Computational models of place are a key component of spatial information theory and play an increasing role in research ranging from spatial search to transportation studies. One method to arrive at such models is to extract knowledge from user-generated content e.g., from texts, tags, trajectories, pictures, and so forth. Over the last years, topic modeling techniques such as latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA) have been studied to reveal linguistic patterns that characterize places and their types. Intuitively, people are more likely to describe places such as Yosemite National Park in terms of hiking, nature, and camping than cocktail or dancing. The geo-indicativeness of non-georeferenced text does not only apply to place instances but also place types, e.g., state parks. While different parks will vary greatly with respect to their landscape and thus human descriptions, the distribution of topics common to all parks will differ significantly from other types of places, e.g., night clubs. This aggregation of topics to the type level creates thematic signatures that can be used for place categorization, data cleansing and conflation, semantic search, and so on. To make full use of these signatures, however, requires a better understanding of their intra-type variability as regional differences effect the predictive power of the signatures. Intuitively, the topic composition for place types such as store and office should be less effected by regional differences than the topic composition for types such as monument and mountain. In this work, we approach this regional variability hypothesis by attempting to prove that all place types are aspatial with respect to their thematic signatures. We reject this hypothesis by comparing the signature similarities of 316 place types between major cities in the U.S. We then select the most and least varying place types and compare them to thematic signatures from regions outside of the U.S. Finally, we explore the effects of LDA topic resolution on differences between and within place types.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The term feature has varying meanings across different communities. Here, following common practice in machine learning, we will use it to refer to the measurable characteristics of points of interest as extracted from geosocial data. We will refer to geographic features as places.

  2. 2.

    Foursquare refers to Points of Interest (POI) as venues.

  3. 3.

    https://developer.foursquare.com/categorytree.

  4. 4.

    e.g., Schema.org or the place hierarchy used by the Ordnance Survey.

References

  • Adams B, Janowicz K (2012). On the geo-indicativeness of non-georeferenced text. In: ICWSM, pp 375–378

    Google Scholar 

  • Adams B, McKenzie G, Gahegan M (2015) Frankenplace: interactive thematic mapping for ad hoc exploratory search. In: 24th international world wide web conference, IW3C2

    Google Scholar 

  • Arun R, Suresh V, Madhavan CV, Murthy MN (2010) On finding the natural number of topics with latent Dirichlet allocation: some observations. In: Advances in knowledge discovery and data mining. Springer, pp 391–402

    Google Scholar 

  • Bao J, Zheng Y, Wilkie D, Mokbel M (2015) Recommendations in location-based social networks: a survey. GeoInformatica 19(3):525–565

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basso KH (1996) Wisdom sits in places: landscape and language among the Western Apache. UNM Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Bentler PM, Bonett DG (1980) Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychol Bull 88(3):588

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blei DM, Ng AY, Jordan MI (2003) Latent Dirichlet allocation. J Mach Learn Res 3:993–1022

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheng C, Yang H, Lyu MR, King I (2013) Where you like to go next: successive point-of-interest recommendation. In: IJCAI, vol 13, pp 2605–2611

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheng Z, Caverlee J, Lee K (2010) You are where you tweet: a content-based approach to geo-locating twitter users. In: Proceedings of the 19th ACM international conference on information and knowledge management. ACM, pp 759–768

    Google Scholar 

  • Cresswell T (2014) Place: an introduction. Wiley

    Google Scholar 

  • Gao H, Tang J, Hu X, Liu H (2013) Exploring temporal effects for location recommendation on location-based social networks. In: Proceedings of the 7th ACM conference on recommender systems. ACM, pp 93–100

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham M, Zook M (2013) Augmented realities and uneven geographies: exploring the geolinguistic contours of the web. Environ Plan A 45(1):77–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths TL, Steyvers M (2004) Finding scientific topics. Proc Natl Acad Sci 101(suppl 1):5228–5235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hecht BJ, Gergle D (2010) On the localness of user-generated content. In: Proceedings of the 2010 ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work. ACM, pp 229–232

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollenstein L, Purves R (2010) Exploring place through user-generated content: using flickr tags to describe city cores. J Spat Inf Sci 1(1):21–48

    Google Scholar 

  • Hu B, Ester M (2013) Spatial topic modeling in online social media for location recommendation. In: Proceedings of the 7th ACM conference on recommender systems. ACM, pp 25–32

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnstone B (2004) Place, globalization, and linguistic variation. Sociolinguist Var Crit Reflect 65–83

    Google Scholar 

  • Kang M (2010) The managed hand: race, gender, and the body in beauty service work. University of California Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Kendall MG, Smith BB (1939) The problem of m rankings. Ann Math Stat 10(3):275–287

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kinsella S, Murdock V, O’Hare N (2011) I’m eating a sandwich in glasgow: modeling locations with tweets. In: Proceedings of the 3rd international workshop on search and mining user-generated contents. ACM, pp 61–68

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin J (1991) Divergence measures based on the shannon entropy. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 37(1):145–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCallum AK (2002) Mallet: a machine learning for language toolkit

    Google Scholar 

  • McKenzie G, Janowicz K, Gao S, Gong L (2015a) How where is when? on the regional variability and resolution of geosocial temporal signatures for points of interest. Comput Environ Urban Syst 54:336–346

    Google Scholar 

  • McKenzie G, Janowicz K, Gao S, Yang J-A, Hu Y (2015b) POI pulse: a multi-granular, semantic signatures-based information observatory for the interactive visualization of big geosocial data. Cartogr Int J Geogr Inf Geovis 50:71–85

    Google Scholar 

  • Mülligann C, Janowicz K, Ye M, Lee W-C (2011) Analyzing the spatial-semantic interaction of points of interest in volunteered geographic information. In: Spatial information theory. Springer, Berlin, pp 350–370

    Google Scholar 

  • Scellato S, Noulas A, Mascolo C (2011) Exploiting place features in link prediction on location-based social networks. In: Proceedings of the 17th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining. ACM, pp 1046–1054

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaw B, Shea J, Sinha S, Hogue A (2013) Learning to rank for spatiotemporal search. In: Proceedings of the sixth ACM international conference on web search and data mining. ACM, pp 717–726

    Google Scholar 

  • Stefanidis A, Crooks A, Radzikowski J (2013) Harvesting ambient geospatial information from social media feeds. GeoJournal 78(2):319–338

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tanasescu V, Jones CB, Colombo G, Chorley MJ, Allen SM, Whitaker RM (2013) The personality of venues: places and the five-factors (‘big five’) model of personality. In: 2013 fourth international conference on computing for geospatial research and application (COM. Geo). IEEE, pp 76–81

    Google Scholar 

  • Tuan Y-F (1991) Language and the making of place: a narrative-descriptive approach. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 81(4):684–696

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ye M, Janowicz K, Mülligann C, Lee W-C (2011) What you are is when you are: the temporal dimension of feature types in location-based social networks. In: Proceedings of the 19th ACM SIGSPATIAL international conference on advances in geographic information systems. ACM, pp 102–111

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Grant McKenzie .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this paper

Cite this paper

McKenzie, G., Janowicz, K. (2017). The Effect of Regional Variation and Resolution on Geosocial Thematic Signatures for Points of Interest. In: Bregt, A., Sarjakoski, T., van Lammeren, R., Rip, F. (eds) Societal Geo-innovation. AGILE 2017. Lecture Notes in Geoinformation and Cartography. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56759-4_14

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics