Research Article
Social Media Meets Big Urban Data: A Case Study of Urban Waterlogging Analysis
Table 2
The results of baseline and transfer learning for five target cities.
| Cities | Social view | Physical view | Total |
| GBRT | Beijing | 0.745 | 0.613 | 0.815 | Shanghai | 0.732 | 0.589 | 0.712 | Hangzhou | 0.555 | 0.511 | 0.711 | Mumbai | 0.781 | 0.631 | 0.811 | New Delhi | 0.781 | 0.711 | 0.722 |
| ANN (not multiview) | Beijing | 0.742 | 0.675 | 0.802 | Shanghai | 0.715 | 0.688 | 0.803 | Hangzhou | 0.713 | 0.566 | 0.814 | Mumbai | 0.832 | 0.662 | 0.802 | New Delhi | 0.754 | 0.744 | 0.813 |
| TrAdaBoost (instance-transfer) | Beijing | 0.762 | 0.676 | 0.812 | Shanghai | 0.755 | 0.617 | 0.883 | Hangzhou | 0.733 | 0.555 | 0.824 | Mumbai | 0.832 | 0.722 | 0.852 | New Delhi | 0.724 | 0.784 | 0.862 |
| Multiview transfer learning with autocoder (feature-transfer) | Beijing | 0.753 | 0.638 | 0.852 | Shanghai | 0.755 | 0.687 | 0.863 | Hangzhou | 0.763 | 0.595 | 0.894 | Mumbai | 0.832 | 0.732 | 0.892 | New Delhi | 0.754 | 0.794 | 0.912 |
|
|