A Modified Inverse Distance Weighting Method for Interpolation in Open Public Places Based on Wi-Fi Probe Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Urban open places with a public service function (e.g., urban parks) are likely to be populated in peak hours and during public events. To mitigate the risk of overcrowding and even events of stampedes, it is of considerable significance to realize a real-time full coverage estimate of the population density. The main challenge has been the limited deployment of crowd surveillance detectors in open public spaces, leading to incomplete data coverage and thus impacting the quality and reliability of the density estimation. To remedy this issue, this paper proposes a modified inverse distance weighting (IDW) method, named the inverse distance weighting based on path selection behavior (IDWPSB) method. The proposed IDWPSB method adjusts the distance decay effect according to visitors’ path selection behavior, which better characterizes the human dynamics in open spaces. By implementing the model in a real-world road network in the Shichahai scenic area in Beijing, China, the study shows a decrease in the absolute deviation by 17.62% comparing the results between the new method and the traditional IDW method, justifying the effectiveness of the new method for spatial interpolation in open public places. By considering the behavioral factor, the proposed IDWPSB method can provide insights into public safety management with the increasing availability of data derived from location-based services.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".