A mobility prediction architecture based on contextual knowledge and spatial conceptual maps
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
User Mobility prediction represents a key component in assisting handoff management, resource reservation, and service preconfiguration. However, most of the existing approaches presume that the user travels in an a priori known pattern with some regularity; an assumption that may not always hold. This paper presents a novel framework for user mobility prediction that can accurately predict the traveling trajectory and destination using knowledge of user's preferences, goals, and analyzed spatial information without imposing any assumptions about the availability of users' movements history. This framework thus incorporates the notion of combining user context and spatial conceptual maps in the prediction process. The main objective of this notion is to circumvent the difficulties that arise in predicting the user's future location when adequate knowledge about the history of user's traveling patterns is not available. Using concepts of evidential reasoning of Dempster-Shafer's theory, the user's navigation behavior is captured by gathering pieces of evidence concerning different groups of candidate future locations. These groups are then refined to predict the user's future location when evidence accumulates using the Dempster rule of combination. Simulation results are presented to demonstrate the performance of the proposed 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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