MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2082633923 · doi:10.1145/2783258.2788570

Predicting Ambulance Demand

2015· article· en· W2082633923 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Zhengyi Zhou, David S. Matteson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKernel density estimationComputer scienceSoftware deploymentExploitKernel (algebra)Task (project management)Temporal scalesData miningScale (ratio)Data scienceGeographyStatisticsCartographyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Predicting ambulance demand accurately at fine time and location scales is critical for ambulance fleet management and dynamic deployment. Large-scale datasets in this setting typically exhibit complex spatio-temporal dynamics and sparsity at high resolutions. We propose a predictive method using spatio-temporal kernel density estimation (stKDE) to address these challenges, and provide spatial density predictions for ambulance demand in Toronto, Canada as it varies over hourly intervals. Specifically, we weight the spatial kernel of each historical observation by its informativeness to the current predictive task. We construct spatio-temporal weight functions to incorporate various temporal and spatial patterns in ambulance demand, including location-specific seasonalities and short-term serial dependence. This allows us to draw out the most helpful historical data, and exploit spatio-temporal patterns in the data for accurate and fast predictions. We further provide efficient estimation and customizable prediction procedures. stKDE is easy to use and interpret by non-specialized personnel from the emergency medical service industry. It also has significantly higher statistical accuracy than the current industry practice, with a comparable amount of computational expense.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.319
Threshold uncertainty score0.522

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations44
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUrban Transport and AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207