Proceedings of the International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Information Retrieval 2014
DOI: 10.5220/0005152404110417
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Subjectivity and Objectivity in Urban Knowledge Representation

Abstract: The question of subjectivity and objectivity of information is an important open issue in the knowledge engineering research community. In the context of space representation, they have been traditionally considered competing themes in the study of places, particularly in urban ones. This is highlighted by the distance, in terms of cultural training and operational approach, between the professionals of the city: urban planners and urban anthropologists. The growth in modeling capabilities allows a quantitativ… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

2
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 18 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Future research on the informal district of BaSECo will be focused on the verification on-site of the findings obtained from the configuration analysis. This step will be relevant to develop a more appropriate and specific methods to integrate new knowledge by using ad hoc techniques [100][101][102] based on the formal representation of the urban environment through ontologies [67,103] and the "smart" use of big data [104,105].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Future research on the informal district of BaSECo will be focused on the verification on-site of the findings obtained from the configuration analysis. This step will be relevant to develop a more appropriate and specific methods to integrate new knowledge by using ad hoc techniques [100][101][102] based on the formal representation of the urban environment through ontologies [67,103] and the "smart" use of big data [104,105].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%