Using Smartphones and Sensor Technologies to Automate Collection of Travel Data
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
This paper presents a data collection framework and its prototype application for personal activity–travel surveys through the use of smartphone sensors. The core components of the framework run on smartphones backed by cloud-based (online) services for data storage, information dissemination, and decision support. The framework employs machine-learning techniques to infer automatically activity types and travel modes with minimum interruption for the respondents. The three main components of the framework are (a) 24-h location data collection, (b) a dynamic land use database, and (c) a transportation mode identification component. The location logger is based on the smartphone network and can run for 24 h with minimal impact on smartphone battery life. The location logger is applicable equally in places where Global Positioning System signals are and are not available. The land use information is continuously updated from Internet location services such as Foursquare. The transportation mode identification module is able to distinguish six modes with 98.85% accuracy. The prototype application is conducted in the city of Toronto, Ontario, Canada, and the results clearly indicate the viability of this framework.
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 | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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