Source author record

Patrick Brosi

Patrick Brosi appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Catalog footprint

What is connected

1works
2topics
2close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

1 published item(s)

preprint2020arXiv

Similarity Classification of Public Transit Stations

We study the following problem: given two public transit station identifiers A and B, each with a label and a geographic coordinate, decide whether A and B describe the same station. For example, for "St Pancras International" at (51.5306, -0.1253) and "London St Pancras" at (51.5319, -0.1269), the answer would be "Yes". This problem frequently arises in areas where public transit data is used, for example in geographic information systems, schedule merging, route planning, or map matching. We consider several baseline methods based on geographic distance and simple string similarity measures. We also experiment with more elaborate string similarity measures and manually created normalization rules. Our experiments show that these baseline methods produce good, but not fully satisfactory results. We therefore develop an approach based on a random forest classifier which is trained on matching trigrams between two stations, their distance, and their position on an interwoven grid. All approaches are evaluated on extensive ground truth datasets we generated from OpenStreetMap (OSM) data: (1) The union of Great Britain and Ireland and (2) the union of Germany, Switzerland, and Austria. On all datasets, our learning-based approach achieves an F1 score of over 99%, while even the most elaborate baseline approach (based on TFIDF scores and the geographic distance) achieves an F1 score of at most 94%, and a naive approach of using a geographical distance threshold achieves an F1 score of only 75%. Both our training and testing datasets are publicly available.