Geosocial Media as a Proxy for Security: A Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since the rapid growth of urban populations, the study of urban systems has gained considerable attention from researchers, decision makers, governments, and organizations. Urban systems are complex and dynamic such that they produce emergent patterns such as self-organization and nonlinearity. Agent-based modelling presents an approach to simulating and abstracting urban systems to reveal and study emergent patterns from urban-related entities. However, agent-based models are difficult to effectively optimize and validate without high quality real-world data. Geosocial media data provides agent-based models with location-enabled data at high volumes and frequencies. Integrating agent-based models with geosocial media data presents opportunities in advancing and developing studies in urban systems. This paper provides a general overview of concepts, review of recent applications, and discussion of challenges and opportunities in the context of using geosocial media data in agent-based models for urban systems. We argue that ABMs focused on studying urban systems can benefit greatly from geosocial media data, given that research moves towards standard guidelines that enable the comparison and effective use of ABMs, and geosocial media data under appropriate circumstances and applications.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".