Dynamic Map Label Placement via Deconfliction Groups

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Conventional digital mapping techniques fail to effectively handle overlapping map labels, leading to information loss and performance issues, especially in applications like aeronautical charts where all labels must be shown, as they either delete labels or require costly preprocessing.

Innovation Solution

The method employs deconfliction groups, specialized placement search algorithms, and cell-based weighting to prioritize label placement, allowing overlap while minimizing it, using an Overlap Manager to manage label conflicts and assign weights based on importance, ensuring all labels are displayed without significant performance impact.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Manufacturing precision

If conventional preprocessing techniques (conflict graph building) are used to handle label conflicts, then label placement accuracy improves, but computational performance deteriorates significantly

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvelabel placement accuracyVSAvoidcomputational performance
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent divides the map area into multiple tiles and processes label placement independently for each tile. This segmentation allows parallel processing of different regions, reducing overall computational time while maintaining placement accuracy within each tile context.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent performs preliminary actions by pre-calculating and storing label placement preferences, visibility weights, and conflict resolution rules in data structures before actual label placement. This preprocessing of rules (not full conflict graphs) enables fast runtime decision-making without expensive graph construction.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

2Ease of operation

If labels are deleted or ignored when overlapping occurs, then map clutter is reduced, but information completeness deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemap readabilityVSAvoidlabel information completeness
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSLoss of information

Solution Approach 1:

The patent changes parameters by adjusting label transparency, size, and positioning dynamically based on conflict severity and label importance weights. Instead of binary show/hide decisions, it varies visual parameters to maintain information display while managing clutter through subtle visual adjustments.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The patent resolves two-dimensional label conflicts by moving labels into the third dimension (vertical layering) through adjusted positioning and transparency. Labels are placed at different visual depths and with varying opacity levels, allowing multiple labels to coexist without complete occlusion, thus preserving information while managing visual clutter.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #17Another dimension (Dimensionality change)

3Loss of information

If all labels are displayed on the map, then information completeness improves, but visual clutter increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvelabel information completenessVSAvoidvisual clutter
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of informationVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The patent introduces an intermediary evaluation system that calculates visibility weights and conflict scores for each label based on multiple factors (importance, user preferences, spatial relationships). This intermediary computation layer mediates between the goal of showing all labels and the need to reduce clutter, producing optimized placement decisions that balance both objectives.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

4Adaptability or versatility

If dynamic label placement is implemented, then adaptability to different map views improves, but computational complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedynamic placement adaptabilityVSAvoidalgorithm complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements dynamics by making label placement fully adaptive to current map view, zoom level, and user preferences. The system recalculates optimal positions based on dynamic parameters such as visible area, label importance weights, and detected conflicts, allowing the placement to evolve with changing map conditions rather than using static pre-computed positions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Data Source

PatentUS11994406B2Group-based technique for dynamic label placement
Publication Date: 2024.05.28 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES
  • US11994406B2 patent drawing
  • US11994406B2 patent drawing
  • US11994406B2 patent drawing

AI summary

Systems and methods are provided for label placement that provide necessary information on a map when map features conflict without significantly impacting performance. Embodiments of the present disclosure can handle placement of map labels that vary in size, have prioritized label/feature groupings, apply to point, line, and area features, minimize overlap when there is no more open space, and render fast enough for interactive viewing.