MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3217002698 · doi:10.1109/swc50871.2021.00068

Smart City Transportation Data Analytics with Conceptual Models and Knowledge Graphs

2021· article· en· W3217002698 on OpenAlexafffund
Connor C.J. Hryhoruk, Carson K. Leung, Yan Wen, Hao Zheng

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Management and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersUniversity of Manitoba
KeywordsBig dataComputer scienceData scienceSmart cityAnalyticsTimestampConceptual modelData modelingData analysisKnowledge graphData miningWorld Wide WebComputer securityDatabaseInformation retrievalInternet of Things

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Technological advancements have led to easy and rapid generation and collection of huge amounts of varieties of data from of wide ranges of rich data sources. These big data may be of different levels of veracity, including precise data and imprecise or uncertain data. Embedded in the data are valuable information and useful knowledge that can be discovered by data analytics. Discovered information and knowledge may help to build a smart city and then a smart world. In this paper, we focus on making good fusion of conceptual modelling and knowledge graphs to capture essential data about public transportation (e.g., buses). Specifically, our conceptual model and knowledge graph capture information regarding bus arrival and departure. Some of the captured data can be uncertain (e.g., timestamp, GPS locations of buses) due to the limitations of the measuring devices and methods to collect the data. Nonetheless, the models are helpful in smart city big data analytics of these public transportation data. The discovered knowledge produces insights to users (e.g., city planners, policy makers), which in turn help them to build a smart city.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0060.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.010
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.177 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicData Management and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207