Spatio-semantic coherence in the integration of 3D city models

An increasing number of applications rely on 3D geoinformation. In addition to 3D geometry, these applications particularly require complex semantic information. In the context of spatial data infrastructures the needed data are drawn from distributed sources and often are thematically and spatially fragmented. Straight forward joining of 3D objects would inevitably lead to geometrical inconsistencies such as cracks, permeations, or other inconsistencies. Semantic information can help to reduce the ambiguities for geometric integration, if it is coherently structured with respect to geometry. The paper discusses these problems with special focus on virtual 3D city models and the semantic data model CityGML, an emerging standard for the representation and the exchange of 3D city models based on ISO 191xx standards and GML3. Different data qualities are analyzed with respect to their semantic and spatial structure leading to the distinction of six categories regarding the spatio-semantic coherence of 3D city models. Furthermore, it is shown how spatial data with complex object descriptions support the integration process. The derived categories will help in the future development of automatic integration methods for complex 3D geodata.

[1]  Eliseo Clementini,et al.  A Model for Representing Topological Relationships between Complex Geometric Features in Spatial Databases , 1996, Inf. Sci..

[2]  Jerzy Surma.  A Similarity Measure for Aggregation Taxonomies , 1997 .

[3]  M. Carter.  Computer graphics: Principles and practice , 1997 .

[4]  Thomas Ertl,et al.  Computer Graphics - Principles and Practice, 3rd Edition , 2014 .

[5]  Robert Laurini.  Spatial Multi-Database Topological Continuity and Indexing: A Step Towards Seamless GIS Data Interoperability , 1998, Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci..

[6]  Armin B. Cremers,et al.  Extracting Buildings from Aerial Images Using Hierarchical Aggregation in 2D and 3D , 1998, Comput. Vis. Image Underst..

[7]  Ivar Jacobson,et al.  The Unified Modeling Language User Guide , 1998, J. Database Manag..

[8]  Narushige Shiode,et al.  3D urban models: Recent developments in the digital modelling of urban environments in three-dimensions , 2000 .

[9]  Richard Groot,et al.  Geospatial Data Infrastructure : Concepts, Cases, and Good Practice , 2000 .

[10]  Ralph R. Martin,et al.  Robust Segmentation of Primitives from Range Data in the Presence of Geometric Degeneracy , 2001, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[11]  Steffen Staab,et al.  Measuring Similarity between Ontologies , 2002, EKAW.

[12]  T. H. Kolbe,et al.  Towards unified 3D city models , 2003 .

[13]  Claus Brenner.  BUILDING RECONSTRUCTION FROM LASER SCANNING AND IMAGES , 2003 .

[14]  Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe,et al.  FLEXIBLE GENERATION OF SEMANTIC 3D BUILDING MODELS , 2005 .

[15]  T. H. Kolbe,et al.  CityGML: Interoperable Access to 3D City Models , 2005 .

[16]  Thomas H. Kolbe,et al.  Next Generation 3D City Models - Proceedings of the Joint International ISPRS, EuroSDR, and DGPF Workshop on Next Generation 3D City Models in Bonn, June 2005 , 2005 .

[17]  S. Kampshoff.  MATHEMATICAL MODELS FOR GEOMETRICAL INTEGRATION , 2005 .

[18]  T. H. Kolbe,et al.  The Virtual 3D City Model of Berlin-Managing, Integrating, and Communicating Complex Urban Information , 2006 .

[19]  Lutz Plümer,et al.  Spatial Data Infrastructure Techniques for Flexible Noise Mapping Strategies , 2006, EnviroInfo.

[20]  Fabio Pittarello,et al.  Semantic description of 3D environments: a proposal based on web standards , 2006, Web3D '06.

[21]  Frederico T. Fonseca,et al.  A Framework for Measuring the Interoperability of Geo-Ontologies , 2006, Spatial Cogn. Comput..