Towards Knowledge-Enriched Path Computation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Directions and paths, as commonly provided by navigation systems, are usually derived considering absolute metrics, e.g., finding the shortest path within an underlying road network. With the aid of crowdsourced geospatial data we aim at obtaining paths that do not only minimize distance but also lead through more popular areas using knowledge generated by users. We extract spatial relations such as “nearby ” or “next to ” from travel blogs, that define closeness between pairs of points of interest (PoIs) and quantify each of these relations using a probabilistic model. Subsequently, we create a relationship graph where each node corresponds to a PoI and each edge describes the spatial connection between the respective PoIs. Using Bayesian inference we obtain a probabilistic measure of spatial closeness according to the crowd. Applying this measure to the corresponding road network, we obtain an altered cost function which does not exclusively rely on distance, and enriches an actual road networks taking crowdsourced spatial relations into account. Finally, we propose two routing algorithms on the enriched road networks. To evaluate our approach, we use Flickr photo data as a ground truth for popularity. Our experimental results – based on real world datasets – show that the paths computed w.r.t. our alternative cost function yield competitive solutions in terms of path length while also providing more “popular ” paths, making routing easier and more informative for the user. 1
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 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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.
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".