Map Application Route Request Detection via Input Shape Analysis
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Existing geographic map applications fail to distinguish between user inputs intended as annotations and those requesting route information, leading to confusion and inefficiency in generating routes.
Innovation Solution
The application processes user inputs on a geographic map to differentiate between annotations and route requests by comparing distances and shapes of user-drawn curves or lines to road segments, using the current zoom level to determine if the input represents a request for a route, and generates candidate routes for user selection.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Adaptability or versatility
If the application treats all user inputs as annotations, then the annotation functionality is simple and straightforward, but the application cannot detect route requests leading to missed functionality
Solution Approach 1:
The application changes parameters of the user input (such as straightness, length, proximity to roads) and compares them against threshold values to distinguish route requests from annotations. This allows the system to adapt its behavior based on input characteristics without requiring complex user instructions.
2Measurement precision
If the application compares user input to road segments and generates routes, then route accuracy improves, but processing time and computational resources increase
Solution Approach 1:
The application performs partial route generation by first comparing input characteristics against predefined thresholds to quickly identify likely route requests. Only inputs that meet certain criteria trigger full route generation, reducing overall processing time while maintaining accuracy for genuine route requests.
3Reliability
If the application uses multiple comparison criteria (distance, shape, zoom level) to detect route requests, then detection accuracy improves, but the complexity of the detection algorithm increases
Solution Approach 1:
The detection algorithm is segmented into multiple independent evaluation steps: zoom level check, straightness calculation, distance to road segments, and threshold comparison. Each step processes a specific aspect of the input separately, making the overall complex detection process more manageable and maintainable.
4Ease of operation
If the application presents multiple candidate routes to the user, then user satisfaction and route selection quality improve, but the time to present results and computational overhead increase
Solution Approach 1:
The application generates a limited number of candidate routes (e.g., top 3) rather than all possible routes. This partial generation approach provides users with sufficient choice for easy selection while maintaining reasonable generation speed and computational efficiency.
Data Source
AI summary
An application processes user input with respect to a geographic map to generate annotations associated with locations on that geographic map. Such annotations can include user entered characters and graphics, including curves and lines. The application distinguishes between user inputs that are annotations and user inputs that indicate a request for a route between two locations. In response to user input with respect to a geographic map, the application determines whether the user input is a request for a route. When performing such comparisons, the application uses locations and road segments that are presented at a zoom level corresponding the zoom level applied at the time the user input for the annotation was received. After determining that a user input corresponds to a request for a route, the application generates data describing a route. The application can present a plurality of candidate routes to the user for selection.