2014
DOI: 10.1016/j.datak.2014.02.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Geospatial data streams: Formal framework and implementation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
4

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…TelegraphCQ (online) [14] Possible link for offline with Hermes(PostGis) [74] -Sharing paradigm (Psoup) [16] -Adaptive processing (eddy) [10] -Dynamic scheduling [86] -ST Sampling [76] -Windows aggregation [73] -Windows at different granularity level [72] -Index at different granularity level [77] Flux [81] SCUBA [62] CAPE [78] -Plan migration [97] -Adaptive scheduling [85] -Cluster sharing paradigm [62] -Clustersheddy [63] -Aggregation D-CAPE [84] GeoInsight [48] Microsoft StreamInsight [7] -Fusing horizontal & vertical [7] -Stream partitionning knn range queries [56] -Event-based [7] -Views derived from archive in-memory [48] -Native support for ST stream [6] Infosphere Streams ITS [12] SPADE [7] -scheduling component [89] -operator fusing [49] -basic PE (Processing Element) -map-matching [6] -shortest path -Datafaflow [12] Zaghreb laboratory works -TelegraphCQ -Implementation in java -General framework for MO [30] -Uncertainty handling -Trajectory buffering [55] thors proposes to deal with moving objects in a online way only by processing data in-memory, but this work doesn't take care of distribution aspects.…”
Section: Kostas Patroumpas Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…TelegraphCQ (online) [14] Possible link for offline with Hermes(PostGis) [74] -Sharing paradigm (Psoup) [16] -Adaptive processing (eddy) [10] -Dynamic scheduling [86] -ST Sampling [76] -Windows aggregation [73] -Windows at different granularity level [72] -Index at different granularity level [77] Flux [81] SCUBA [62] CAPE [78] -Plan migration [97] -Adaptive scheduling [85] -Cluster sharing paradigm [62] -Clustersheddy [63] -Aggregation D-CAPE [84] GeoInsight [48] Microsoft StreamInsight [7] -Fusing horizontal & vertical [7] -Stream partitionning knn range queries [56] -Event-based [7] -Views derived from archive in-memory [48] -Native support for ST stream [6] Infosphere Streams ITS [12] SPADE [7] -scheduling component [89] -operator fusing [49] -basic PE (Processing Element) -map-matching [6] -shortest path -Datafaflow [12] Zaghreb laboratory works -TelegraphCQ -Implementation in java -General framework for MO [30] -Uncertainty handling -Trajectory buffering [55] thors proposes to deal with moving objects in a online way only by processing data in-memory, but this work doesn't take care of distribution aspects.…”
Section: Kostas Patroumpas Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In [30] the authors suggest a general framework to deal with moving objects knowing about the limits of TelegraphCQ in [71] and inspired by the algebra defined in [96]. It can be used as a basis for developing a geospatial DSMS but doesn't take into account management and query repartition aspect.…”
Section: Kostas Patroumpas Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This can be seen in techniques defined for queries for superset containment using the ordered keyword trie [6]. Galić et al [7] presented a framework that consists of the types of data and the operations supporting spatial-streaming data. A spatial-temporal language for queries is discussed [8] for processing geo-streaming data.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A number of successful attempts have been made for the challenge that current GIS applications face. For example, Galić et al [2] presents a formal framework consisting of data types and operations needed to support geo-streaming data. In [3], a spatio-temporal query language is proposed to process semantic geo-streaming data.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%