I first implemented what I talked about in the last post: I took 3 windows of 3 prior points a piece and averaged each window into a number. If the previous window's average was bigger, I coded this as a 0. Otherwise, it was a 1.
This didn't work so well - there were more 1's than I wanted to see in a normal, no-kidnapping dataset.
The next thing I tried was taking the same 9 previous points and comparing them consecutively - if prev_point9 > prev_point8, it's a 0, and otherwise a 1. That resulted in the dataset below.
I like this one because it represents short-lived spikes and longer-term increases.
Weaknesses of this modeling approach:
1. Doesn't represent the intensity of the increase (magnitude of the slope). I think it's mostly the degree of the slope that differentiates a kidnapping instance's covariance spike from a regular localization covariance spike.
2. I'd like a way of identifying "This timestep and the 5 previous timesteps were ALL 1's" - somehow, that needs to make it into the model.
Time/Covariance[0] | t9>8 | t 8>7 | t7>6 | t 6>5 | t 5>4 | t 4>3 | t 3>2 | t 2>1 |
32.68 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
43 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
43.36 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
43.64 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
44.18 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
50.3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
50.57 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
54 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
56.17 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
57.52 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
58.44 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
61.6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
62.4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
65.14 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
69.98 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
73.63 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
73.93 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
74.33 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
77.55 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
80.56 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
81.55 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
85.61 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
86.2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
88.1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
89.54 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
91.81 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
93.91 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
94.47 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
95.91 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
97.32 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
102.73 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
104.1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
104.61 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
105.72 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
107.29 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
108.7 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
110.17 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
111.98 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
113.45 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
114.23 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
114.82 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
118.75 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
120.1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
123.97 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
126.51 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
129.75 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
130 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
130.29 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
130.56 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
131.8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
131.28 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
131.59 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
132.75 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
133.5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
134.2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
134.76 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
135.62 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
136.23 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
137.76 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
138.89 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
140.61 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
141.88 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
143.37 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
144.71 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
No comments:
Post a Comment