MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2976735552 · doi:10.1109/icdim.2018.8847135

Mining Trajectory Data and Identifying Patterns for Taxi Movement Trips

2018· article· en· W2976735552 on OpenAlexaff
Rami Ibrahim, M. Omair Shafiq

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHuman Mobility and Location-Based Analysis
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrajectoryCluster analysisComputer scienceGeographic coordinate systemGlobal Positioning SystemTRIPS architectureData miningIdentification (biology)Point (geometry)Scale (ratio)Urban computingGeographyArtificial intelligenceMachine learningMathematicsCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In past years, trajectory data generated from Automatic Identification System (AIS) networks and taxi GPS devices increased significantly. There is a high demand for analyzing this data and extracting the knowledge from it. Large-scale taxi trajectory data is represented by a sequence of timestamped geographical locations, this sequence starts with the origin point and ends with the destination point. Applying data mining techniques such as clustering on trajectory data can provide useful information about the movement patterns and the behavior of people. Thus, can enhance the transportation management services in terms of urban planning and environment issues. In this paper, we propose a methodology which extracts movement patterns of taxi trips in Porto, Portugal. we cluster taxi trips using Hierarchical Density-Based Spatial Clustering of Applications with Noise (HDBSCAN) algorithm, each point in the trip is a pair of coordinates which consists of longitude and latitude values.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHuman Mobility and Location-Based AnalysisFrench-language works237,207