Modelling Place Visit Probability Sequences during Trajectory Data Gaps Based on Movement History
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The acquisition of human trajectories facilitates movement data analytics and location-based services, but gaps in trajectories limit the extent in which many tracking datasets can be utilized. We present a model to estimate place visit probabilities at time points within a gap, based on empirical mobility patterns derived from past trajectories. Different from previous models, our model makes use of prior information from historical data to build a chain of empirically biased random walks. Therefore, it is applicable to gaps of varied lengths and can be fitted to empirical data conveniently. In this model, long gaps are broken into a chain of multiple episodes according to past patterns, while short episodes are estimated with anisotropic location transition probabilities. Experiments show that our model is able to hit almost 60% of the ground truth for short gaps of several minutes and over 40% for longer gaps up to weeks. In comparison, existing models are only able to hit less than 10% and 1% for short and long gaps, respectively. Visit probability distributions estimated by the model are useful for generating paths in data gaps, and have potential for disaggregated movement data analysis in uncertain environments.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".