Exploring Intercity Mobility in Urban Agglomeration: Evidence from Private Car Trajectory Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, we explore intercity mobility in urban agglomerations by surveying people traveling across cities based on private car trajectory data. Specifically, we first adopt the statistical analysis method to mine the intercity mobility in terms of various metrics of travel trips, so as to gain a preliminary understanding of intercity mobility in urban agglomeration. Then, we utilize the tensor decomposition method to conduct in-depth study on the intercity mobility pattern from the perspectives of complexity and multidimensionality. We construct a 4-D tensor based on private car trajectory and point-of-interest (POI) datasets and define the functional similarity and geographic adjacency between regions. Finally, we design an alternating proximal gradient (APG)-based method to resolve the core tensor and factor matrix, leading to the fine-grained discovery of intercity mobility patterns on administrative divisions in the urban agglomeration. Extensive experiments are conducted to evaluate the analysis of intercity mobility, using a real-world dataset containing one-year private car trajectories from five cities in the selected urban agglomeration. The experiments show that the proposed method successfully captures 20 intercity mobility patterns, in which the factor matrices retrieve the patterns from different dimensions with core tensors characterizing correlations between patterns in factor matrices. Besides, the extracted intercity mobility patterns not only cover administrative areas with frequent intercity interactions, but also contain areas with less intercity interactions. It validates that the intercity mobility is consistent with the regional functions in urban agglomeration.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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".