Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29436509›Full record

ArticleJournal of the Royal Society, Interface2018

Tracking random walks.

Riccardo Gallotti, Rémi Louf, Jean-Marc Luck, Marc Barthelemy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the Royal Society, Interface, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Simulation of pandemics in real cities: enhanced and accurate digital laboratories.Proceedings. Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2021
    Article
  3. Article
  4. How ants move: individual and collective scaling properties.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2018
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Riccardo GallottiInstituto de Física Interdisciplinar y Sistemas Complejos (IFISC), CSIC-UIB, Campus UIB, ES-07122 Palma de Mallorca, Spain.
Rémi LoufCentre for Advanced Spatial Analysis (CASA), University College London, London W1T 4TJ, UK.
Jean-Marc LuckInstitut de Physique Théorique, Université Paris-Saclay, CEA and CNRS, 91191 Gif-sur-Yvette, France.
Marc BarthelemyInstitut de Physique Théorique, Université Paris-Saclay, CEA and CNRS, 91191 Gif-sur-Yvette, France marc.barthelemy@ipht.fr.ORCID 0000-0003-0890-9713

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In empirical studies, trajectories of animals or individuals are sampled in space and time. Yet, it is unclear how sampling procedures bias the recorded data. Here, we consider the important case of movements that consist of alternating rests and moves of random durations and study how the estimate of their statistical properties is affected by the way we measure them. We first discuss the ideal case of a constant sampling interval and short-tailed distributions of rest and move durations, and provide an exact analytical calculation of the fraction of correctly sampled trajectories. Further insights are obtained with simulations using more realistic long-tailed rest duration distributions showing that this fraction is dramatically reduced for real cases. We test our results for real human mobility with high-resolution GPS trajectories, where a constant sampling interval allows one to recover at best 18% of the movements, while over-evaluating the average trip length by a factor of 2. Using a sampling interval extracted from real communication data, we recover only 11% of the moves, a value that cannot be increased above 16% even with ideal algorithms. These figures call for a more cautious use of data in quantitative studies of individuals' movements.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsModels, BiologicalFemaleHumansMaleRandom AllocationWalkinganimal movementhuman mobilityrenewal theorystatistical physics

Identifiers

PMID29436509
PMCPMC5832728

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.