MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2345984828

Pedestrian Activity Pattern Mining in WiFi-Network Connection Data

2016· article· en· W2345984828 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Guilhem Poucin, Bilal Farooq, Zachary Patterson

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Board 95th Annual MeetingTransportation Research Board · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHuman Mobility and Location-Based Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPedestrianCluster analysisIdentification (biology)Computer scienceData miningSet (abstract data type)Context (archaeology)Point (geometry)Data setSpace (punctuation)Data scienceMachine learningEngineeringArtificial intelligenceTransport engineeringGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article proposes a methodology to mine valuable information about pedestrian use of a facility based only on the WiFi network connection history data. Data are collected in Concordia University, Montreal, Canada. Working with a limited set of information, the authors tried to characterize the different pedestrian activity patterns in an analytic way without the prior knowledge of the different locations covered by the WiFi connection data. The goal of this research is to develop an analytical tool that is spatially transferable to different facilities. Moreover it is able to distinguish the main pedestrian activity patterns by looking at the WiFi network logs only. The methodology is based on the identification and generation of pertinent variables for data clustering and time-space activity identification. A K-means clustering algorithm is then used for the construction of a set of 6 activity patterns associated with activities in a campus context. The authors then discuss a few potential additional applications by analysing the inter-access point behaviour that WiFi connection data offer, as well as the challenges caused by space-time inaccuracies.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.606
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.158
GPT teacher head0.443
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations9
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Board 95th Annual MeetingTransportation Research BoardSame topicHuman Mobility and Location-Based AnalysisFrench-language works237,207