A Semantic View on Planetary Mapping—Investigating Limitations and Knowledge Modeling through Contextualization and Composition
-
Published:2023-03-16
Issue:6
Volume:15
Page:1616
-
ISSN:2072-4292
-
Container-title:Remote Sensing
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Remote Sensing
Author:
van Gasselt Stephan1ORCID, Nass Andrea2ORCID
Affiliation:
1. Geomatics Group, Department of Land Economics, National Chengchi University, Taipei 11605, Taiwan 2. Department of Planetary Geology, Institute of Planetary Research, German Aerospace Centre (DLR), 12489 Berlin, Germany
Abstract
The concept of planetary mapping constitutes different activities within different contexts. Much like the field of cartography, it is an amalgamation of science, techniques, and artistic disciplines. It has undergone considerable changes over the last decades to cope with increasing demands related to data management, analysis, and visualization. Planetary mapping employs abstraction, which involves simplifications and generalizations. It aims to produce accessible visualization of planetary surfaces to gain insights and knowledge. Here, we show that different manifestations of this concept are interdependent and we discuss how different mapping concepts relate to each other semantically. We reason that knowledge gain can only be achieved through thematic mapping. The reasoning for systematic mapping and exploration is an intellectual product of thematic mapping. In order to highlight these relationships, we (a) develop in-depth definitions for different types of planetary mapping, (b) discuss data and knowledge flow across different mapping concepts, and (c) highlight systemic limitations related to data that we acquire and attempt to abstract through models. We finally develop a semantic proto-model that focuses on the transformation of information and knowledge between mapping domains. We furthermore argue that due to compositionality, map products suffer not only from abstraction but also from limitations related to uncertainties during data processing. We conclude that a complete database is needed for mapping in order to establish contextualization and extract knowledge. That knowledge is needed for reasoning for planning and operational decision making. This work furthermore aims to motivate future community-based discussions on functional semantic models and ontologies for the future development of knowledge extraction from thematic maps.
Subject
General Earth and Planetary Sciences
Reference95 articles.
1. Greeley, R., and Batson, R.M. (1990). Planetary Mapping, Cambridge University Press. 2. Greeley, R., and Batson, R.M. (1990). Planetary Mapping, Cambridge University Press. 3. Kirk, R.L. (2016, January 21–25). Planetary Cartography: What, How, and Why Begin with Where. Proceedings of the 47th Annual Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, The Woodlands, TX, USA. 4. Skinner, J.A., Fortezzo, C.M., Gaither, T.A., Hare, T.M., Huff, A.E., and Hunter, M.A. (2018, January 19–23). The USGS-NASA Planetary Geologic Mapping Program: Status, Process, and Future Plans. Proceedings of the 49th Annual Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, The Woodlands, TX, USA. 5. Planetary Cartography—Activities and Current Challenges;Nass;Proc. ICA,2018
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|