MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2248937416 · doi:10.1109/icdm.2015.45

Spatio-Temporal Topic Models for Check-in Data

2015· article· en· W2248937416 on OpenAlexaff
Yu Liu, Martin Ester, Bo Hu, David W. Cheung

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHuman Mobility and Location-Based Analysis
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerplexityComputer scienceTopic modelData modelingData miningTemporal databaseData scienceInformation retrievalArtificial intelligenceLanguage modelDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Twitter, together with other online social networks, such as Facebook, and Gowalla have begun to collect hundreds of millions of check-ins. Check-in data captures the spatial and temporal information of user movements and interests. To model and analyze the spatio-temporal aspect of check-in data and discover temporal topics and regions, we propose two spatio-temporal topic models: Downstream Spatio-Temporal Topic Model (DSTTM) and Upstream Spatio-Temporal Topic Model (USTTM). Both models can discover temporal topics and regions. We use continuous time to model check-in data, rather than discretized time, avoiding the loss of information through discretization. In order to capture the property that user's interests and activity space will change over time, we propose the USTTM, where users have different region and topic distributions at different times. We conduct experiments on Twitter and Gowalla data sets. In our quantitative analysis, we evaluate the effectiveness of our models by the perplexity, the accuracy of POI recommendations, and user prediction, demonstrating that our models achieve better performance than the state-of-the-art models.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.264
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.136 · 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

Citations21
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHuman Mobility and Location-Based AnalysisFrench-language works237,207