MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2071248930 · doi:10.3138/carto.48.2.1837

An Information Model for Pedestrian Routing and Navigation Databases Supporting Universal Accessibility

2013· article· en· W2071248930 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mari Laakso, Tapani Sarjakoski, Lassi Lehto, L. Tiina Sarjakoski

Bibliographic record

VenueCartographica The International Journal for Geographic Information and Geovisualization · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Management and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFP7 Information and Communication Technologies
KeywordsGeospatial analysisComputer sciencePedestrianConceptual modelDatabaseData model (GIS)Class (philosophy)Routing (electronic design automation)Information modelInformation retrievalData miningArtificial intelligenceTransport engineeringGeographyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study focuses on the information content of the geospatial databases used to guide pedestrians as well as those with disabilities. In this paper we introduce an information model for describing this content. The model covers the physical environment faced by a person moving on foot. We have used the Unified Modeling Language class diagrams to formalize the information model on a conceptual level. The features are divided into two abstract top-level classes: one allowing pedestrian access and the other hindering it. A consistent and comprehensive pedestrian network is at the core of the model. The model also covers other geographical information to increase accessibility. The aim of the created information model is to help data providers to collect and store appropriate data using the appropriate methods.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0080.010
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.295 · 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

Citations18
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCartographica The International Journal for Geographic Information and GeovisualizationSame topicData Management and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207