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