mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

"Is not the truth the truth?": Analyzing the Impact of User Validations for Bus In/Out Detection in Smartphone-based Surveys

arXiv 2202.11961 ↗First posted 24 Feb 2022cs.HC cs.LGcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Passenger flow allows the study of users' behavior through the public network and assists in designing new facilities and services. This flow is observed through interactions between passengers and infrastructure. For this task, Bluetooth technology and smartphones represent the ideal solution. The latter component allows users' identification, authentication, and billing, while the former allows short-range implicit interactions, device-to-device. To assess the potential of such a use case, we need to verify how robust Bluetooth signal and related machine learning (ML) classifiers are against the noise of realistic contexts. Therefore, we model binary passenger states with respect to a public vehicle, where one can either be-in or be-out (BIBO). The BIBO label identifies a fundamental building block of continuously-valued passenger flow. This paper describes the Human-Computer interaction experimental setting in a semi-controlled environment, which involves: two autonomous vehicles operating on two routes, serving three bus stops and eighteen users, as well as a proprietary smartphone-Bluetooth sensing platform. The resulting dataset includes multiple sensors' measurements of the same event and two ground-truth levels, the first being validation by participants, the second by three video-cameras surveilling buses and track. We performed a Monte-Carlo simulation of labels-flip to emulate human errors in the labeling process, as is known to happen in smartphone surveys; next we used such flipped labels for supervised training of ML classifiers. The impact of errors on model performance bias can be large. Results show ML tolerance to label flips caused by human or machine errors up to 30%.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 88 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 24 Feb 2022.

Builds on

17 of 88 references.

References · 17

  1. 2017Multi-Task Learning Using Uncertainty to Weigh Losses for Scene Geometry and Semanticscited by 1,345
  2. 2014Semi-Supervised Learning with Deep Generative Modelscited by 494
  3. 2017Wasserstein Auto-Encoderscited by 371
  4. 2014Training Deep Neural Networks on Noisy Labels with Bootstrappingcited by 322
  5. 2016Split-Brain Autoencoders: Unsupervised Learning by Cross-Channel Predictioncited by 217
  6. 2018Using Trusted Data to Train Deep Networks on Labels Corrupted by Severe Noisecited by 216
  7. 2019Probabilistic End-to-end Noise Correction for Learning with Noisy Labelscited by 210
  8. 2017Deep Learning is Robust to Massive Label Noisecited by 164
  9. 2019Peer Loss Functions: Learning from Noisy Labels without Knowing Noise Ratescited by 142
  10. 2017Deep learning from crowdscited by 105
  11. 2019catch22: CAnonical Time-series CHaracteristicscited by 103
  12. 2014Training Convolutional Networks with Noisy Labelscited by 47
5 more
  1. 2017Learning Deep Networks from Noisy Labels with Dropout Regularizationcited by 32
  2. 2018Inferring transportation modes from GPS trajectories using a convolutional neural networkcited by 26
  3. 2016Inferring Person-to-person Proximity Using WiFi Signalscited by 4
  4. 2019Mining User Behaviour from Smartphone data: a literature reviewcited by 3
  5. 2020Softwarization, Virtualization, & Machine Learning For Intelligent & Effective V2X Communicationscited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.