MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2020019218 · doi:10.1111/1467-9671.00111

Spatio‐Temporal Object‐Oriented Data Model for Disaggregate Travel Behavior

2002· article· en· W2020019218 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ali Frihida, Danielle J. Marceau, Marius Thériault

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions in GIS · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Management and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceExploitObject (grammar)Domain (mathematical analysis)Data model (GIS)HierarchyField (mathematics)Travel behaviorConceptual modelProcess (computing)Focus (optics)Data miningDatabaseArtificial intelligenceEngineeringTransport engineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The research field of transportation demand forecasting has started to focus on disaggregate travel behavior and micro‐simulation models. To create data infrastructure, disaggregate trip surveys are conducted and large numbers of observations are collected. To efficiently exploit these surveys, the transfer of the individual trip data to a GIS must start with the development of a solid conceptual data model that fully captures the semantic richness of the application domain and emphasizes its spatio‐temporal properties. This paper presents a data modeling process that is based on a combination of complex system theory and the object‐oriented paradigm and produced an object‐oriented spatio‐temporal data model. Main domain entities are modeled as highly structured classes. They encapsulate a memory of their time bound connections and states. Observation data sets are sampled from the origin‐destination survey conducted in the Québec region in 1991. This survey incorporated street networks and activity places. The model was smoothly implemented into a proof‐of‐concept database prototype hosted by an object‐oriented GIS shell. The prototype offers a means to navigate through a nested hierarchy of objects, providing a description of an individual’s travel behavior over space and time. The objects have a solid conceptual basis and can meet the needs of scientific research such as hypothesis formulation, simulation, forecasting and induction.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.084
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.207 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations61
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions in GISSame topicData Management and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207