MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111006103

Anomaly detection in maritime data based on geometrical analysis of trajectories

2015· article· en· W2111006103 on OpenAlexaff
Behrouz Haji Soleimani, Érico N. de Souza, Casey Hilliard, Stan Matwin

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Conference on Information Fusion · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMaritime Navigation and Safety
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnomaly detectionAbnormalityComputer scienceTrajectoryAutomatic Identification SystemsortPath (computing)Artificial intelligenceAnomaly (physics)GraphData miningPattern recognition (psychology)Information retrieval
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations20
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Conference on Information FusionSame topicMaritime Navigation and SafetyFrench-language works237,207