Anomaly detection in maritime data based on geometrical analysis of trajectories
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Anomaly detection is an important use of the Automatic Identification Systems (AIS), because it offers support to users to evaluate if a vessel is in trouble or causing trouble. For instance, it can be used to detect if a ship is doing something that may cause an accident or if it has changed its route to avoid bad weather condition. In this work, a new method for finding anomalies in the ships' movements is proposed. The method analyzes the trajectory of ships from a geometrical perspective. The trajectory of the ship is compared with a near-optimal path that is generated by a graph search algorithm. The proposed method extracts some scale-invariant features from the real trajectory and also from the optimal movement pattern, and it compares the two sets of features to generate an abnormality score. The method is unsupervised and it does not require training. Instead of labeling the trajectories as normal/abnormal it calculates a score value that denotes the extent of abnormality. The scoring scheme provides a ranking system in which the user can sort the trajectories based on their abnormality score. This is useful when dealing with large number of trajectories and the user wants to picks the most abnormal cases. For the evaluation, the method was run on three months data of North Pacific Ocean and score values were generated. Among the entire dataset, 100 randomly chosen trajectories were labeled by an expert. After applying a threshold on the score value, the proposed method had 94% accuracy.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it