MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Computational Analysis to Capture Cluster Lifetime Dynamics

2021· article· en· W4205900257 on OpenAlex
Ivens Portugal, Paulo Alencar, Donald Cowan

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venue2021 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHuman Mobility and Location-Based Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCluster analysisCluster (spacecraft)Data miningLimitingSpatial analysisMobile deviceMachine learningGeographyRemote sensingEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spatial-temporal data analysis aims at uncovering useful insights and patterns from data that is associated with a location and that changes with time. Spatial-temporal data can comprise massive datasets obtained from multiple sources, including mobile devices, cameras, radar, and other types of sensors. Traditional analysis techniques allow researchers to perform several tasks, including classification, regression, and clustering. Specifically, clustering methods have been widely adopted in domains such as transportation, smart cities, and astronomy. However, current clustering techniques fail to analyze a moving cluster from its start to finish, limiting themselves to investigating static clusters. This study introduces a framework that takes into consideration the entire life of a mobile cluster and describes its lifetime based on dynamic spatial-temporal relationships that the cluster has with other clusters or trajectories. The framework is evaluated using two case studies, which involve taxi trajectories and human mobility.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.868
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.201
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.185 · 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