MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3015182559 · doi:10.3390/s20072057

A Trajectory Collaboration Based Map Matching Approach for Low-Sampling-Rate GPS Trajectories

2020· article· en· W3015182559 on OpenAlexafffund
Wentao Bian, Ge Cui, Xin Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Management and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsGlobal Positioning SystemMap matchingTrajectoryComputer scienceMatching (statistics)Sampling (signal processing)Assisted GPSComputer visionMathematicsStatisticsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

GPS (Global Positioning System) trajectories with low sampling rates are prevalent in many applications. However, current map matching methods do not perform well for low-sampling-rate GPS trajectories due to the large uncertainty between consecutive GPS points. In this paper, a collaborative map matching method (CMM) is proposed for low-sampling-rate GPS trajectories. CMM processes GPS trajectories in batches. First, it groups similar GPS trajectories into clusters and then supplements the missing information by resampling. A collaborative GPS trajectory is then extracted for each cluster and matched to the road network, based on longest common subsequence (LCSS) distance. Experiments are conducted on a real GPS trajectory dataset and a simulated GPS trajectory dataset. The results show that the proposed CMM outperforms the baseline methods in both, effectiveness and efficiency.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations19
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicData Management and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207