Uncertainty and error are integral parts of science and technology, including GIS&T, as they are of most human endeavors. They are important characteristics of knowledge, which is very seldom perfect. Error and uncertainty both affect our understanding of the present and the past, and our expectations from the future. ‘Uncertainty’ is sometimes used as the umbrella term for a number of related concepts, of which ‘error’ is the most important in GIS and in most other data-intensive fields. Very often, uncertainty is the result of error (or suspected error).  As concepts, both uncertainty and error are complex, each having several different versions, interpretations, and kinds of impacts on the quality of GIS products, and on the uses and decisions that users may make on their basis. This section provides an overview of the kinds of uncertainty and common sources of error in GIS&T, the role of a number of additional related concepts in refining our understanding of different forms of imperfect knowledge, the problems of uncertainty and error in the context of decision-making, especially regarding actions with important future consequences, and some standard as well as more exploratory approaches to handling uncertainties about the future. While uncertainty and error are in general undesirable, they may also point to unsuspected aspects of an issue and thus help generate new insights.

This entry follows in the footsteps of Anselin’s famous 1989 NCGIA working paper entitled “What is special about spatial?” (a report that is very timely again in an age when non-spatial data scientists are ignorant of the special characteristics of spatial data), where he outlines three unrelated but fundamental characteristics of spatial data. In a similar vein, I am going to discuss some philosophical perspectives that are internally unrelated to each other and could warrant individual entries in this Body of Knowledge. The first one is the notions of space and time and how they have evolved in philosophical discourse over the past three millennia. Related to these are aspects of absolute versus relative conceptions of these two fundamental constructs. The second is a brief introduction to key philosophical approaches and how they impact geospatial science and technology use today. The third is a discussion of which of the promises of the Quantitative Revolution in Geography and neighboring disciplines have been fulfilled by GIScience (and what is still missing). The fourth and final one is an introduction to the role that GIScience may play in what has recently been formalized as theory-guided data science.

We live in a dynamic world that includes various types of changes at different locations over time in natural environments as well as in human societies. Modern sensing technology, location-aware technology and mobile technology have made it feasible to collect spatiotemporal tracking data at a high spatial and temporal granularity and at affordable costs. Coupled with powerful information and communication technologies, we now have much better data and computing platforms to pursue computational modeling of spatiotemporal dynamics. Researchers have attempted to better understand various kinds of spatiotemporal dynamics in order to predict, or even control, future changes of certain phenomena. A simple approach to representing spatiotemporal dynamics is by adding time (t) to the spatial dimensions (x,y,z) of each feature. However, spatiotemporal dynamics in the real world are more complex than a simple representation of (x,y,z,t) that describes the location of a feature at a given time. This article presents selected concepts, computational modeling approaches, and sample applications that provide a foundation to computational modeling of spatiotemporal dynamics. We also indicate why the research of spatiotemporal dynamics is important to geographic information systems (GIS) and geographic information science (GIScience), especially from a temporal GIS perspective.

Relationships between space and time evoke fundamental questions in the sciences and humanities. Many disciplines, including GIScience, consider that space and time extend in separate dimensions, are interchangeable, and form co-equal parts of a larger thing called space-time.  Our perception of how time operates in relation to space or vice verso influences how we represent space, time, and their relationships in GIS. The chosen representation, furthermore, predisposes what questions we can ask and what approaches we can take for analysis and modeling. There are many ways to think about space, time, and their relationships in GIScience. This article synthesizes five broad categories: (1) Time is independent of space but relates to space by movement and change; (2) Time collaborates with space to probe relationships, explanations, and predictions; (3) Time is spatially constructed and contained; (4) Time and space are mutually inferable; and (5) Time and space are integrated and co-equal in the formation of flows, events, and processes. Concepts, constructs, or law-like statements arise in each of the categories as examples of how space, time, and their relationships help frame scientific inquiries in GIScience and beyond.

Flow mapping is a cartographic method of representing movement of phenomena. Maps of this type often depict the vector movement of entities (imports and exports, people, information) between geographic areas, but the general method also encompasses a range of graphics illustrating networks (e.g., transit and communications grids) and dynamic systems (e.g., wind and water currents). Most flow maps typically use line symbols of varying widths, lengths, shapes, colors, or speeds (in the case of animated flow maps) to show the quality, direction, and magnitude of movements. Aesthetic considerations for flow maps are numerous and their production is often done manually without significant automation. Flow maps frequently use distorted underlying geography to accommodate the placement of flow paths, which are often dramatically smoothed/abstracted into visually pleasing curves or simply straight lines. In the extreme, such maps lack a geographic coordinate space and are more diagrammatic, as in Sankey diagrams, alluvial diagrams, slope graphs, and circle migration plots. Whatever their form, good flow maps should effectively visualize the relative magnitude and direction of movement or potential movement between a one or more origins and destinations.