This document discusses the integration of indoor navigation with outdoor navigation systems. It reviews how existing route planners handle indoor data and address matching. There are currently differences in indoor data availability and quality across systems. Indoor addresses are often linked to single entrance/exit points, not accounting for indoor network topology. Full integration faces challenges regarding data acquisition standards, indoor geocoding, and positioning techniques. Improved methodologies and focus on large stable indoor infrastructures may help close the gap between indoor and outdoor navigation.

1. Tearing down the walls:
closing the gap between outdoor and
indoor navigation
Ann Vanclooster - Philippe De Maeyer
Department of Geography – CartoGIS cluster
Ghent University
Ann.Vanclooster@UGent.be
October 12, 2011
Geomatics 2011 - Montréal

2. Outline
• Applications for navigation
• Research goal and assumptions
• Route planner review:
– Availability of indoor data
– Indoor address matching
• Product-to-market implications
• Conclusion
Tearing down the walls: closing the gap between outdoor and indoor navigation
Oct 12, 2011 2
Ann Vanclooster - Ann.Vanclooster@UGent.be

3. Applications for navigation
• Variety of outdoor navigation systems
• Efforts for indoor navigation
– technological issues
– indoor (3D) models
• Focus on pedestrian navigation
– specific requirements: context, environment, mode of
locomotion, scale level
– seamless movement between indoor and outdoor space
Need to extend outdoor navigation systems
to the indoor world!
Tearing down the walls: closing the gap between outdoor and indoor navigation
Oct 12, 2011 3
Ann Vanclooster - Ann.Vanclooster@UGent.be

4. Research goal and assumptions
Goal:
state of the art in integration of indoor infrastructures
for navigation  based on what route planners do
Resources and assumptions:
• ‘common’ outdoor route planners
• indoor infrastructures
• pedestrian navigation
Route planner integration with 2 focuses:
– How do they handle indoor data?
– How are indoor addresses linked to spatial data?
Tearing down the walls: closing the gap between outdoor and indoor navigation
Oct 12, 2011 4
Ann Vanclooster - Ann.Vanclooster@UGent.be

5. 1. Use of indoor data
Indoor infrastructure part of the shortest path
Bing Google Maps Mappy
Via Michelin RouteNet OpenRouteService
Tearing down the walls: closing the gap between outdoor and indoor navigation
Oct 12, 2011 5
Ann Vanclooster - Ann.Vanclooster@UGent.be

6. 1. Use of indoor data
Indoor infrastructure part of the shortest path
Naver Google Maps
Differences in
• data availability
• level of detail of indoor data
Tearing down the walls: closing the gap between outdoor and indoor navigation
Oct 12, 2011 6
Ann Vanclooster - Ann.Vanclooster@UGent.be

7. 1. Use of indoor data
Availability of entrance information
Bing Google Maps Mappy
Via Michelin RouteNet OpenRouteService
Tearing down the walls: closing the gap between outdoor and indoor navigation
Oct 12, 2011 7
Ann Vanclooster - Ann.Vanclooster@UGent.be

8. 1. Use of indoor data
Multimodal example
Naver Google Maps
Tearing down the walls: closing the gap between outdoor and indoor navigation
Oct 12, 2011 8
Ann Vanclooster - Ann.Vanclooster@UGent.be

9. 1. Use of indoor data
Points learned
• Mostly no incorporation of indoor infrastructures
 Lack of available indoor data
– Data gathering
– Geographical area of the query
– Commercial value
• Available indoor data: differences in LoD
• Underground structures
• 3D indoor data
Tearing down the walls: closing the gap between outdoor and indoor navigation
Oct 12, 2011 9
Ann Vanclooster - Ann.Vanclooster@UGent.be

10. 2. Indoor address matching
On the same network edge
Mappy Via Michelin RouteNet
It is not possible to calculate
the route because the route
planner maps the departure
and arrival locations on the
same location.
Tearing down the walls: closing the gap between outdoor and indoor navigation
Oct 12, 2011 10
Ann Vanclooster - Ann.Vanclooster@UGent.be

11. 2. Indoor address matching
Influence on exit choice
Bing Google Maps Mappy
Via Michelin OpenRouteService
Tearing down the walls: closing the gap between outdoor and indoor navigation
Oct 12, 2011 11
Ann Vanclooster - Ann.Vanclooster@UGent.be

12. 2. Indoor address matching
Points learned
Both indoor and outdoor problem
• Outdoor: suboptimal routing
– link address to single exit/entrance point
– not accounted for destination of query
• Indoor: network information available
– lineair interpolation on network
 partly correct if on different edges
– projection on outdoor network
– unable to calculate
Tearing down the walls: closing the gap between outdoor and indoor navigation
Oct 12, 2011 12
Ann Vanclooster - Ann.Vanclooster@UGent.be

13. Product-to-market implications
Is it feasible to integrate indoor with outdoor
navigation?
3 focus points:
1) Data acquisition, standards and accuracy
2) Indoor geocoding challenges
3) Feasibility of integration
Tearing down the walls: closing the gap between outdoor and indoor navigation
Oct 12, 2011 13
Ann Vanclooster - Ann.Vanclooster@UGent.be

14. Product-to-market implications
Data acquisition, standards and accuracy
• Current data sources:
local and global providers commercially linked
• Raw data acquisition:
– no aerial images, mobile mapping
– many existing internal data from various sources and
applications
– diversity in quality, coverage, structure, ...
– no standard for indoor data (under development)
• Network transformation:
no mathematically sound framework
Tearing down the walls: closing the gap between outdoor and indoor navigation
Oct 12, 2011 14
Ann Vanclooster - Ann.Vanclooster@UGent.be

15. Product-to-market implications
Indoor geocoding challenges
= assigning geographical coordinates to certain input
source (e.g. postal addresses)
• input source
• reference data set (e.g. Tiger)
Requirements • processing algorithm (e.g. linear interpolation)
• required output
• non-existing uniformity in indoor addressing
Problems  different processing methodology
• no appropriate and reliable reference data set
Tearing down the walls: closing the gap between outdoor and indoor navigation
Oct 12, 2011 15
Ann Vanclooster - Ann.Vanclooster@UGent.be

16. Conclusion
Feasibility of integration
• No complete data gathering feasible
– small data enhancements
– focus on large, stable infrastructures
– 3D aspect
– public participation
– existing indoor information
• Improved geocoding methodologies
• Full navigation system: positioning techniques
Tearing down the walls: closing the gap between outdoor and indoor navigation
Oct 12, 2011 16
Ann Vanclooster - Ann.Vanclooster@UGent.be

17. Thank you for
your attention
Tearing down the walls: closing the gap between outdoor and indoor navigation
Oct 12, 2011 17
Ann Vanclooster - Ann.Vanclooster@UGent.be