MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381848339 · doi:10.1111/gean.12368

Temporal Network Kernel Density Estimation

2023· article· en· W4381848339 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jérémy Gelb, Philippe Apparicio

Bibliographic record

VenueGeographical Analysis · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUrban Design and Spatial Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKernel density estimationComputer scienceDimension (graph theory)EstimationBandwidth (computing)Kernel (algebra)PedestrianDensity estimationPoint (geometry)Data miningGeographyStatisticsTelecommunicationsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Kernel density estimation (KDE) is a widely used method in geography to study concentration of point pattern data. Geographical networks are 1.5 dimensional spaces with specific characteristics, analyzing events occurring on networks (accidents on roads, leakages of pipes, species along rivers, etc.). In the last decade, they required the extension of spatial KDE. Several versions of Network KDE (NKDE) have been proposed, each with their particular advantages and disadvantages, and are now used on a regular basis. However, scant attention has been given to the temporal extension of NKDE (TNKDE). In practice, when the studied events happen at specific time points and are constrained on a network, the methodologies used by geographers tend to overlook either the network or the temporal dimension. Here we propose a TNKDE based on the recent development of NKDE and the product of kernels. We also adapt classical methods of KDE (Diggle's correction, Abramson's adaptive bandwidth and bandwidth selection by leave‐one‐out maximum likelihood). We also illustrate the method with Montreal road crashes involving a pedestrian between 2016 and 2019.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Citations28
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeographical AnalysisSame topicUrban Design and Spatial AnalysisFrench-language works237,207