Map Database Disambiguation Codes for Duplicate Localities
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current map databases struggle to effectively differentiate duplicate yet disjoint localities, leading to ambiguity and inefficiency in navigation systems, as they rely on county names which are not widely recognized outside local areas and fail to condense similar names into single entries, resulting in unwieldy indexes and user confusion.
Innovation Solution
The method involves indexing and storing duplicate localities with nearby significant cities or towns that are recognizable to users, ensuring they do not overlap or share geographic items, and using techniques like tokenizing, normalizing, and matching to condense similar names into single entries, thereby reducing database size and improving user experience.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Measurement precision
If duplicate localities are adorned with county names to distinguish them, then the localities can be differentiated, but users experience confusion because county names are not widely recognized outside local areas
Solution Approach 1:
The patent introduces an intermediary approach by using a combination of the locality name and a disambiguation code (e.g., Washington, NJ, AA) rather than relying solely on county names. This intermediary code system acts as a mediator between the need for precise differentiation and user-friendly recognition, allowing unique identification without requiring users to know geographic administrative divisions.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent changes the parameter used for differentiation from county names (geographic administrative parameter) to a disambiguation code system (alphanumeric identifier parameter). This parameter change allows precise differentiation while improving user recognition, as codes can be systematically generated and displayed without requiring external geographic knowledge.
2Adaptability or versatility
If map databases store separate entries for each similar locality name (e.g., Ho-Ho-Kus, Ho Ho Kus, Ho-Ho-Kus (Hohokus)), then each name can be found by users, but the database index becomes unwieldy in size
Solution Approach 1:
The patent merges multiple similar locality name entries into a single canonical entry by identifying them as referring to the same geographic location. Instead of maintaining separate entries for Ho-Ho-Kus, Ho Ho Kus, and Ho-Ho-Kus (Hohokus), the system consolidates them into one entry with a single disambiguation code, thereby reducing database index size while preserving the ability to recognize and match various name variations through normalization and matching algorithms.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent creates a universal disambiguation code system that can handle multiple name variations for the same locality. This universal approach allows the database to efficiently store and retrieve information regardless of the specific name variation used by users, making the system multi-functional in handling different naming conventions without proportionally increasing database size.
3Measurement precision
If map databases adorn duplicate localities with county names, then differentiation is achieved, but the system complexity increases due to the need to manage and query county information
Solution Approach 1:
The patent extracts the differentiation function from the county name system and implements it through a simpler disambiguation code system. By taking out the requirement to manage and query county information, the system reduces data management complexity while maintaining precise differentiation capability through generated codes that can be independently managed.
4Adaptability or versatility
If similar locality names are not condensed into single entries, then all name variations are available for user search, but navigation devices with limited memory cannot efficiently store the database
Solution Approach 1:
The patent merges multiple name variations for the same locality into a single database entry, significantly reducing the memory footprint for navigation devices. By consolidating entries for Ho-Ho-Kus, Ho Ho Kus, and Ho-Ho-Kus (Hohokus) into one entry with a disambiguation code, the system maintains name variation recognition capability while reducing database size to fit limited-memory devices.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent creates a compact representation (disambiguation code) that serves as a efficient copy or reference to the full locality information. This copying approach allows the database to store minimal information while maintaining the ability to identify and differentiate localities, reducing memory requirements without losing essential functionality.
Data Source
AI summary
A method and system for differentiating duplicate yet disjoint localities, such as cities, within a state or other principal geographic unit of interest is for use with electronic maps and databases. Duplicate locality name entries are stored in a database, locality name database entries are condensed for localities having two or more similar names, and adornments for duplicate locality names are stored in the database. In the adornment selection process, for a first duplicate locality, a second duplicate locality is selected that is closest to the first. Selected adornments are first and second significant localities, such as large cities, and are closer to the first and second duplicate localities, respectively, than the first and second duplicate localities are to each other, and are more significant than the first and second duplicate localities. Adornments to duplicate localities are displayed to the user. The process is repeated for remaining duplicate localities.