MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2088906176 · doi:10.1214/13-aoas626

Travel time estimation for ambulances using Bayesian data augmentation

2013· article· en· W2088906176 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Bradford S. Westgate, Dawn B. Woodard, David S. Matteson, Shane G. Henderson

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Annals of Applied Statistics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransportation Planning and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlobal Positioning SystemBayesian probabilityComputer scienceEstimationPath (computing)Data miningStatisticsMathematicsArtificial intelligenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce a Bayesian model for estimating the distribution of ambulance travel times on each road segment in a city, using Global Positioning System (GPS) data. Due to sparseness and error in the GPS data, the exact ambulance paths and travel times on each road segment are unknown. We simultaneously estimate the paths, travel times, and parameters of each road segment travel time distribution using Bayesian data augmentation. To draw ambulance path samples, we use a novel reversible jump Metropolis–Hastings step. We also introduce two simpler estimation methods based on GPS speed data. We compare these methods to a recently published travel time estimation method, using simulated data and data from Toronto EMS. In both cases, out-of-sample point and interval estimates of ambulance trip times from the Bayesian method outperform estimates from the alternative methods. We also construct probability-of-coverage maps for ambulances. The Bayesian method gives more realistic maps than the recently published method. Finally, path estimates from the Bayesian method interpolate well between sparsely recorded GPS readings and are robust to GPS location errors.

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)0.021
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.144
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations109
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Annals of Applied StatisticsSame topicTransportation Planning and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207