Learning Semantic Relationships of Geographical Areas based on Trajectories
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mining trajectory data to find interesting patterns is of increasing research interest due to a broad range of useful applications, including analysis of transportation systems, location-based social networks, and crowd behavior. The primary focus of this research is to leverage the abundance of trajectory data to automatically and accurately learn latent semantic relationships between different geographical areas (e.g., semantically correlated neighborhoods of a city) as revealed by patterns of moving objects over time. While previous studies have utilized trajectories for this type of analysis at the level of a single geographical area, the results cannot be easily generalized to inform comparative analysis of different geographical areas. In this paper, we study this problem systematically. First, we present a method that utilizes trajectories to learn low-dimensional representations of geographical areas in an embedded space. Then, we develop a statistical method that allows to quantify the degree to which real trajectories deviate from a theoretical null model. The method allows to (a) distinguish geographical proximity to semantic proximity, and (b) inform a comparative analysis of two (or more) models obtained by trajectories defined on different geographical areas. This deep analysis can improve our understanding of how space is perceived by individuals and inform better decisions of urban planning. Our experimental evaluation aims to demonstrate the effectiveness and usefulness of the proposed statistical method in two large-scale real-world data sets coming from the New York City and the city of Porto, Portugal, respectively. The methods we present are generic and can be utilized to inform a number of useful applications, ranging from location-based services, such as point-of-interest recommendations, to finding semantic relationships between different cities.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".