Geometric problem solving with strings and pins

IF 1.6 4区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Spatial Cognition and Computation Pub Date : 2018-12-24 DOI:10.1080/13875868.2018.1531415
C. Freksa, T. Barkowsky, Zoe Falomir, J. V. D. Ven
{"title":"Geometric problem solving with strings and pins","authors":"C. Freksa, T. Barkowsky, Zoe Falomir, J. V. D. Ven","doi":"10.1080/13875868.2018.1531415","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Humans solve spatial and abstract problems more easily if these can be visualized and/or physically manipulated. We analyze the domain of geometric problem solving from a cognitive perspective and identify several levels of domain abstraction that interact in the problem solving process. We discuss the roles of physical manifestations of spatial configurations, their manipulation, and their perception for understanding problem solving processes. We propose an extension of the classical problem solving repertoire of constructive geometry to approach certain problems more directly than under the compass-and-straightedge paradigm. Specifically, we introduce strings and pins as helpful metaphors for a generalization of the constructive geometry approach. We present classical problems from spatial problem solving to illustrate the ‘strings and pins’ paradigm. Three case studies are discussed: strings-and-pins solutions to (i) the ellipse construction problem; (ii) the shortest path problem; and (iii) the angle trisection problem. Comparisons to formal solutions are drawn. Differences and similarities between the compass-and-straightedge paradigm and the strings-and-pins paradigm are analyzed. Features and limitations of constructive and depictive geometry as well as implications for computational approaches are discussed. The strings-and-pins domain is shown to be more general and less restrictive than the compass-and-straightedge domain.","PeriodicalId":46199,"journal":{"name":"Spatial Cognition and Computation","volume":"10 1","pages":"46 - 68"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Spatial Cognition and Computation","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13875868.2018.1531415","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

ABSTRACT Humans solve spatial and abstract problems more easily if these can be visualized and/or physically manipulated. We analyze the domain of geometric problem solving from a cognitive perspective and identify several levels of domain abstraction that interact in the problem solving process. We discuss the roles of physical manifestations of spatial configurations, their manipulation, and their perception for understanding problem solving processes. We propose an extension of the classical problem solving repertoire of constructive geometry to approach certain problems more directly than under the compass-and-straightedge paradigm. Specifically, we introduce strings and pins as helpful metaphors for a generalization of the constructive geometry approach. We present classical problems from spatial problem solving to illustrate the ‘strings and pins’ paradigm. Three case studies are discussed: strings-and-pins solutions to (i) the ellipse construction problem; (ii) the shortest path problem; and (iii) the angle trisection problem. Comparisons to formal solutions are drawn. Differences and similarities between the compass-and-straightedge paradigm and the strings-and-pins paradigm are analyzed. Features and limitations of constructive and depictive geometry as well as implications for computational approaches are discussed. The strings-and-pins domain is shown to be more general and less restrictive than the compass-and-straightedge domain.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
用绳子和大头针解决几何问题
如果空间和抽象问题可以可视化和/或物理操作,人类解决这些问题会更容易。我们从认知的角度分析了几何问题解决的领域,并确定了在问题解决过程中相互作用的几个层次的领域抽象。我们讨论了空间构型的物理表现,它们的操作,以及它们对理解问题解决过程的感知的作用。我们提出了构造几何经典解题曲目的扩展,以更直接地解决某些问题,而不是在指南针和直线范式下。具体地说,我们引入弦和针作为有益的隐喻,以推广建设性几何方法。我们从空间问题解决的经典问题来说明“弦和针”范式。讨论了三个案例研究:(i)椭圆结构问题的串销解决方案;(ii)最短路径问题;(三)角三分问题。与正式解决方案进行了比较。分析了“圆规直尺”范式与“绳针”范式的异同。构造几何和描绘几何的特点和局限性以及对计算方法的影响进行了讨论。弦针域比罗盘直尺域更普遍,限制更少。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Spatial Cognition and Computation
Spatial Cognition and Computation PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
5.30%
发文量
10
期刊最新文献
In memoriam: Christian Freksa (1950-2020) Treat robots as humans? Perspective choice in human-human and human-robot spatial language interaction Direction information is more influential than distance information in memory for location relative to landmarks Task-dependent sketch maps Evidence for flexible navigation strategies during spatial learning involving path choices
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1