MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3087237611 · doi:10.1145/3274895.3274982

Creating full individual-level location timelines from sparse social media data

2018· preprint· en· W3087237611 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Nabeel Abdur Rehman, Kunal Relia, Rumi Chunara

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHuman Mobility and Location-Based Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersYork UniversityNational Science Foundation
KeywordsTimelineHeuristicsComputer scienceSocial mediaInferenceBaseline (sea)GeolocationGlobal Positioning SystemData scienceData miningArtificial intelligenceWorld Wide WebGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In many domain applications, a continuous timeline of human locations is critical; for example for understanding possible locations wherea disease may spread, or the flow of traffic. While data sources such as GPS trackers or Call Data Records are temporally-rich, they are expensive, often not publicly available or garnered only in select locations, restricting their wide use. Conversely, geo-located social media data are publicly and freely available, but present challenges especially for full timeline inference due to their sparse nature. We propose a stochastic framework, Intermediate Location Computing (ILC) which uses prior knowledge about human mobility patterns to predict every missing location from an individual's social media timeline. We compare ILC with a state-of-the-art RNN baseline as well as methods that are optimized for next-location prediction only. For three major cities, ILC predicts the top 1 location for all missing locations in a timeline, at 1 and 2-hour resolution, with up to 77.2% accuracy (up to 6% better accuracy than all compared methods). Specifically, ILC also outperforms the RNN in settings of low data; both cases of very small number of users (under 50), as well as settings with more users, but with sparser timelines. In general, the RNN model needs a higher number of users to achieve the same performance as ILC. Overall, this work illustrates the tradeoff between prior knowledge of heuristics and more data, for an important societal problem of filling in entire timelines using freely available, but sparse social media data.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.364
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.225
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.148 · 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.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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