Bibliographic record
Abstract
$\newcommand{\c}{\mathcal{C}}\newcommand{\R}{\mathbb{R}}$An important task in trajectory analysis is clustering. The results of a clustering are often summarized by a single representative trajectory and an associated size of each cluster. We study the problem of computing a suitable representative of a set of similar trajectories. To this end we define a central trajectory $\c$, which consists of pieces of the input trajectories, switches from one entity to another only if they are within a small distance of each other, and such that at any time $t$, the point $\c(t)$ is as central as possible. We measure centrality in terms of the radius of the smallest disk centered at $\c(t)$ enclosing all entities at time $t$, and discuss how the techniques can be adapted to other measures of centrality. We first study the problem in $\R^1$, where we show that an optimal central trajectory $\c$ representing $n$ trajectories, each consisting of $\tau$ edges, has complexity $\Theta(\tau n^2)$ and can be computed in $O(\tau n^2 \log n)$ time. We then consider trajectories in $\R^d$ with $d\geq 2$, and show that the complexity of $\c$ is at most $O(\tau n^{5/2})$ and can be computed in $O(\tau n^3)$ time.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.045 | 0.011 |
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".