Recover Fine-Grained Spatial Data from Coarse Aggregation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we study a new type of spatial sparse recovery problem, that is to infer the fine-grained spatial distribution of certain density data in a region only based on the aggregate observations recorded for each of its subregions. One typical example of this spatial sparse recovery problem is to infer spatial distribution of cellphone activities based on aggregate mobile traffic volumes observed at sparsely scattered base stations. We propose a novel Constrained Spatial Smoothing (CSS) approach, which exploits the local continuity that exists in many types of spatial data to perform sparse recovery via finite-element methods, while enforcing the aggregated observation constraints through an innovative use of the ADMM algorithm. We also improve the approach to further utilize additional geographical attributes. Extensive evaluations based on a large dataset of phone call records and a demographical dataset from the city of Milan show that our approach significantly outperforms various state-of-the-art approaches, including Spatial Spline Regression (SSR).
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 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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".