Extracting Interesting Regions and Trips from Taxi Trajectory Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The increasing availability of cutting-edge location-acquisition technologies such as GPS devices, has led to the generation of huge datasets of spatial trajectories. These trajectories store important information regarding the movement of people, vehicles, robots, animals, users of social networks, etc. Many research initiatives have applied data mining techniques in order to extract useful knowledge from this data. An important, and yet complicated, pre-processing step in mining patterns from trajectory data, is the identification of the Regions of Interest (RoI) that have been collectively navigated by a set of trajectories. The RoI’s are being manually and subjectively pre-defined by a group of experts as popular regions, regardless of the actual behaviour of the moving objects. This research emphasizes the usefulness of applying an unsupervised machine learning technique, namely Self Organizing Map (SOM), in order to identify the RoI’s associated with a trajectory dataset depending on the moving objects’ behaviour. The research experiments were conducted using 180 thousand of the trajectories generated by 442 taxis running in the city of Porto, in Portugal, and they demonstrate the ability of SOM in identifying the RoI’s and interesting taxi trips within the city.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".