MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W387271453

Origin-Destination Trip Estimation from Anonymous Cell Phone and Foursquare Data

2015· article· en· W387271453 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
S. A. Rokib, Ahsanul Karim, Tony Z. Qiu, Amy Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Board 94th Annual MeetingTransportation Research Board · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHuman Mobility and Location-Based Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhoneComputer scienceEstimationMobile phonePenetration rateTelecommunicationsEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Travel surveys, which are time-consuming and costly, are required for traditional origin-destination (OD) demand matrix estimation. Recently, the availability of alternative data sources (cell phone and social networking data such as Foursquare) has shown great potential in offsetting the limitations of traditional OD estimation techniques. This study estimated OD flows for the city of Edmonton in Alberta, Canada, from cell phone (CP) and Foursquare data, using existing methodologies. CP data have a relatively high penetration rate; the venue density and check-ins in Foursquare are quite high as well. Anonymous CP data were collected from a major cellular service provider (with one-third market penetration) for a day in July 2014. Foursquare check-in data were also collected using the Foursquare API. Trip patterns from estimated cell phone locations and Foursquare check-in data were compared to an existing OD matrix constructed from travel surveys. The CP and Foursquare data were consistent with OD pairs expected to have higher trip volumes. However, there were some differences in trip volumes and patterns among the three sources. The results illustrate the promising potential of using CP and social network data for OD matrix estimation.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.534
Threshold uncertainty score0.938

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.189
GPT teacher head0.447
Teacher spread0.258 · 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
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

Citations7
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Board 94th Annual MeetingTransportation Research BoardSame topicHuman Mobility and Location-Based AnalysisFrench-language works237,207