Utilization of Real Time Behavior and Geographical Attraction for Location Recommendation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Personalized location recommendation is an increasingly active topic in recent years, which recommends appropriate locations to users based on their temporal and geospatial visiting patterns. Current location recommendation methods usually estimate the users’ visiting preference probabilities from the historical check-ins in batch. However, in practice, when users’ behaviors are updated in real-time, it is often cost-inhibitive to re-estimate and updates users’ visiting preference using the same batch methods due to the number of check-ins. Moreover, an important nature of users’ movement patterns is that users are more attracted to an area where have dense locations with same categories for conducting specific behaviors. In this paper, we propose a location recommendation method called GeoRTGA by utilizing the real time user behaviors and geographical attractions to tackle the problems. GeoRTGA contains two sub-models: real time behavior recommendation model and attraction-based spatial model. The real time behavior recommendation model aims to recommend real-time possible behaviors which users prefer to visit, and the attraction-based spatial model is built to discover the category-based spatial and individualized spatial patterns based on the geographical information of locations and corresponding location categories and check-in numbers. Experiments are conducted on four public real-world check-in datasets, which show that the proposed GeoRTGA outperforms the five existing location recommendation methods.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it