MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3012056563 · doi:10.5539/mas.v14n4p44

Spatial-temporal Dynamics of Population Aggregation during the Spring Festival based on Baidu Heat Map in Central Area of Chengdu City, China

2020· article· en· W3012056563 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yunjiao Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHuman Mobility and Location-Based Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpring (device)ChinaPopulationContext (archaeology)GeographyDistribution (mathematics)DemographySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The application of location-aware devices and location-based services enables big data to provide a convenient and efficient way to study the dynamics of urban population distribution. Based on the Baidu heat map data, the spatial-temporal population aggregation in the main urban areas of Chengdu City was explored in the context of the Spring Festival. The results suggested that population aggregation showed regular fluctuation within a day, consistent with the commuting activities. Also, population mobility showed difference before, during and after the festival; population density during the holiday was significantly lower than that on the other two working days, meanwhile the heat value on the working day before the festival was slightly higher than that after the festival. The conclusion showed that the Spring Festival affected the population distribution density. Chinese government’s emergent measures taken to suppress the nationwide spread of COVID_19 at early 2020 also had great influence on the low population aggregation during and after the Spring Festival, indicating the effectiveness of emergency control of human interactions. Better understanding of Spatial-temporal dynamics of population aggregation during the Spring Festival is of great value for optimizing the city expansion and structure planning.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.303
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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