MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2583613911 · doi:10.1002/env.2437

Model‐based clustering for spatiotemporal data on air quality monitoring

2017· article· en· W2583613911 on OpenAlexaff
Amay S.M. Cheam, Matthieu Marbac, Paul D. McNicholas

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmetrics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Methods and Mixture Models
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCluster analysisData miningComputer scienceAutoregressive modelMixture modelIdentifiabilityExpectation–maximization algorithmInformation CriteriaModel selectionBayesian information criterionAir quality indexStatisticsMathematicsMaximum likelihoodArtificial intelligenceMachine learningGeographyMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Data extracted from air quality monitoring can require spatiotemporal clustering techniques. Of late, many clustering techniques are based on mixture models; however, there is a shortage of model‐based approaches for spatiotemporal data. A new mixture to cluster spatiotemporal data, named STM, is introduced, and generic identifiability is proved. The resulting model defines each mixture component as a mixture of autoregressive polynomial regressions in which the weights consider the spatial and temporal information with logistic links. Under the maximum likelihood framework, parameter estimation is carried out via an expectation–maximization algorithm while classical information criteria can be used for model selection. The proposed model is applied to air quality monitoring data from the periphery of Paris considering one of the critical pollutants, nitrogen dioxide, at different times during the day. The STM model is implemented in the R package SpaTimeClust.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.248
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.152 · 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

Citations24
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmetricsSame topicBayesian Methods and Mixture ModelsFrench-language works237,207