GPS-Enhanced Tourist Mobility Modeling with Seasonal Spatial Priors and LLM-Based Activity Chain Generation

Bo Yang; Chris Stanford; Haoxuan Ma; Jiaqi Ma; Morgan Sun; Xishun Liao; Yanling Sang; Yifan Liu; Zhiyuan Zhang

REVIEW 2 major objections 1 minor 37 references

GPS-Enhanced Tourist Mobility Modeling with Seasonal Spatial Priors and LLM-Based Activity Chain Generation

T0 review · 2 major / 1 minor · reviewed 2026-06-29 · grok-4.3

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read A four-stage framework generates synthetic tourist schedules whose ward-level visitation shares match Tokyo survey distributions using aggregated GPS priors and LLM activity chains.

desk verdict The four-stage pipeline is a reasonable combination of priors and LLM generation, but the reported aggregates do not show the LLM step is doing meaningful work. read the letter →

arxiv 2605.29578 v1 pith:Y4GVAFVX submitted 2026-05-28 cs.AI

Yifan Liu , Yanling Sang , Xishun Liao , Morgan Sun , Bo Yang , Zhiyuan Zhang , Chris Stanford , Haoxuan Ma

show 1 more author

Jiaqi Ma

This is my paper

classification cs.AI

keywords touristmobilitysyntheticschedulesGPSspatialpriorsLLMactivitygenerationurbantransportationTokyotourismseasonalpatternsdemographicalignment

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper sets out a simulation approach for tourist travel that first extracts month-specific location preferences from aggregated GPS and survey sources, then predicts trip lengths from traveler demographics, assigns feasible sequences of city wards by distance, and finally uses an LLM to build daily activity chains while respecting household composition and spatial limits. Only aggregated GPS forms are retained, so no individual movement records are stored or exposed. A sympathetic reader would care because the resulting schedules reproduce both overall survey patterns and month-by-month ward visitation shares derived from staypoint analysis, supplying usable inputs for transportation planning without routine data collection. The Tokyo experiments confirm that GPS-based cohort extraction recovers spatial signatures consistent with independent survey references.

What carries the argument

Four-stage simulation framework that derives month-conditioned spatial priors from aggregated GPS and survey data, predicts trip extents from demographics, assigns distance-feasible ward sequences, and generates activity chains via LLM under household and spatial constraints.

What would settle it

Applying the same framework to a second city and finding that the generated ward-level visitation shares deviate substantially from that city's independent survey measurements or staypoint patterns.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The framework produces demographically aligned synthetic schedules whose ward-level visitation shares align closely with both survey distributions and staypoint derived monthly visitation patterns, achieved by combining month-conditioned spatial priors derived from GPS and survey data, trip extent prediction from tourist demographics, distance-feasible ward sequence assignment, and LLM-based activity chain generation under household and spatial constraints.

Load-bearing premise

LLM-generated activity chains, when constrained only by household composition and spatial ward sequences, will produce mobility patterns that generalize beyond the Tokyo validation data.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

The colleague should know that this paper puts forward a four-stage pipeline for synthetic tourist schedules that starts with month-conditioned GPS aggregates, adds demographic trip extent and distance-feasible ward sequences, then uses an LLM to fill in activity chains under household and spatial constraints. The experiments claim the final outputs match survey and staypoint ward-level patterns, but that match alone does not isolate what the LLM contributes.

What is new is the explicit sequencing of those four pieces with tourist-specific conditioning on season, household composition, and distance feasibility. Prior work either stayed at aggregate patterns or generated schedules without that tourist structure, so the combination itself is not already described in the literature the abstract cites.

The paper handles the GPS data in aggregated form only, which is a sensible privacy choice, and it tries to bake in demographic and group rules that matter for tourism. That part is straightforward and grounded.

The soft spots are larger. The abstract supplies no quantitative metrics, sample sizes, or error bars for the alignment claim. More critically, the first three stages already encode the spatial and demographic structure, so any final ward-level match could occur even if the LLM step adds little beyond plausible text. The stress-test concern holds up on the given description: without breakdowns by demographic group, activity-type distributions, or constraint-violation rates, there is no evidence the LLM is load-bearing rather than decorative. Generalization beyond the Tokyo data is also untested.

This work is aimed at urban computing and transportation planning groups that need synthetic tourist schedules for simulation. A reader in that niche might pick up the pipeline structure, but anyone focused on whether LLMs improve schedule realism will find the evidence too thin.

It deserves a serious referee because the framework is clearly motivated and the privacy approach is practical, even if the current validation leaves open questions about the LLM component. I would send it to review so the authors can supply the missing breakdowns and clarify whether the LLM stage changes any measurable outcome.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a four-stage framework for tourist mobility simulation: (1) month-conditioned spatial priors from aggregated GPS and survey data, (2) demographic-based trip extent prediction, (3) distance-feasible ward sequence assignment, and (4) LLM-based activity chain generation constrained by household composition and spatial sequences. On Tokyo tourism data, it claims the GPS cohort extraction recovers survey-consistent spatial signatures and that the full framework yields demographically aligned synthetic schedules whose ward-level visitation shares match both survey distributions and staypoint-derived monthly patterns.

Significance. If the central claim holds with proper validation, the framework would provide a privacy-preserving (aggregated GPS only) method for generating realistic, demographically structured synthetic tourist schedules that incorporate seasonal, group-composition, and attraction-driven effects. This could support transportation planning applications where individual traces cannot be used.

major comments (2)

[Experiments] Experiments section: the reported results consist solely of aggregate ward-level visitation share alignment with survey and staypoint data. Because stages 1–3 already encode month-conditioned spatial priors and distance-feasible ward sequences, this metric alone does not establish that the LLM activity-chain stage contributes demographic or schedule realism; an ablation (LLM vs. non-LLM) or per-demographic/activity-type breakdown is required to show the LLM step is load-bearing for the claimed alignment.
[Abstract / Experiments] Abstract and Experiments: no quantitative metrics (e.g., MAE, KL divergence, R² values), error bars, sample sizes, or description of post-generation filtering are supplied to support the alignment claims, making it impossible to assess whether the reported matches exceed what the spatial priors alone would produce.

minor comments (1)

[Abstract] The abstract states that 'GPS data are used only in privacy preserving aggregated form' but provides no explicit statement on whether any individual-level data leakage could occur during LLM prompting or ward-sequence construction.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback on our experimental validation. The comments correctly identify gaps in demonstrating the LLM stage's specific contribution and in providing quantitative support for the alignment claims. We will revise the manuscript to address both points.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Experiments] Experiments section: the reported results consist solely of aggregate ward-level visitation share alignment with survey and staypoint data. Because stages 1–3 already encode month-conditioned spatial priors and distance-feasible ward sequences, this metric alone does not establish that the LLM activity-chain stage contributes demographic or schedule realism; an ablation (LLM vs. non-LLM) or per-demographic/activity-type breakdown is required to show the LLM step is load-bearing for the claimed alignment.

Authors: We agree that aggregate alignment alone is insufficient to isolate the LLM stage's contribution. In the revised manuscript we will add an ablation comparing the full four-stage framework against a non-LLM baseline that uses the same spatial priors and distance-feasible sequences but replaces LLM activity-chain generation with rule-based or random assignment under identical household and spatial constraints. We will also report per-demographic and per-activity-type breakdowns of visitation shares and schedule statistics to show where the LLM component improves demographic realism beyond stages 1–3. revision: yes
Referee: [Abstract / Experiments] Abstract and Experiments: no quantitative metrics (e.g., MAE, KL divergence, R² values), error bars, sample sizes, or description of post-generation filtering are supplied to support the alignment claims, making it impossible to assess whether the reported matches exceed what the spatial priors alone would produce.

Authors: We acknowledge that the current version lacks explicit quantitative metrics, error bars, sample sizes, and filtering details. The revised Experiments section will report MAE and KL divergence between synthetic and reference ward-level visitation distributions, include error bars from multiple independent simulation runs, state the number of synthetic tourists generated per demographic cohort, and describe any post-generation filtering. These additions will allow direct comparison of alignment strength with and without the LLM stage. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity in the four-stage simulation pipeline

full rationale

The paper presents an empirical four-stage framework (spatial priors from aggregated GPS/survey, demographic trip extent, feasible ward sequences, LLM activity chains) whose outputs are validated against independent external references (survey distributions and staypoint patterns). No equations, fitted parameters, or self-citations are described that would reduce the reported alignment metrics to quantities defined by the same inputs by construction. The validation step compares final synthetic schedules to held-out data sources rather than re-deriving them from the priors, satisfying the criteria for a self-contained modeling pipeline.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 0 assumptions · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review; no explicit free parameters, mathematical axioms, or newly postulated entities are named. The framework implicitly relies on the unstated assumption that aggregated GPS visitation counts constitute valid seasonal priors and that LLM outputs under the listed constraints remain distributionally faithful to real tourist behavior.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of GPS-Enhanced Tourist Mobility Modeling with Seasonal Spatial Priors and LLM-Based Activity Chain Generation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/Y4GVAFVX

@misc{pith2026260529578,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: GPS-Enhanced Tourist Mobility Modeling with Seasonal Spatial Priors and LLM-Based Activity Chain Generation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/Y4GVAFVX}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2605.29578}
}

read the original abstract

Tourist mobility poses a distinct challenge for urban transportation planning. Unlike resident commuting, tourist travel is largely non-routine, attraction driven, and highly sensitive to trip purpose, travel season, and trip member composition. Existing approaches either measure aggregate tourist spatial patterns without generating individual schedules, or synthesize mobility without tourist specific structure such as trip duration conditioning, month varying attraction demand, and household co-travel rules. To address these challenges, we propose a four stage simulation framework combining month conditioned spatial priors derived from GPS and survey data, trip extent prediction from tourist demographics, distance feasible ward sequence assignment, and LLM-based activity chain generation under household and spatial constraints. GPS data are used only in privacy preserving aggregated form as month conditioned spatial priors, with no individual traces retained or exposed. Experiments on tourism in Tokyo demonstrate that the GPS based tourist cohort extraction recovers spatial visitation signatures consistent with survey references, and our framework produces demographically aligned synthetic schedules whose ward-level visitation shares align closely with both survey distributions and staypoint derived monthly visitation patterns. The results demonstrate the framework's effectiveness as a geographically grounded, demographically aware approach to tourist mobility modeling.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.29578 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** Structure of the Stage-3 prompt design. The generation module uses a structured prompt system illustrated in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Ward-level visit share comparison across GPS ex [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (3 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Stage 1 prediction results for nights stayed and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: Stage 3 activity type distribution by purpose group. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_6.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Monthly alignment diagnostics for Stage 2 ward [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

37 extracted references · 4 canonical work pages

[1]

Activity-based disaggregate travel demand model system with activity schedules,

J. L. Bowman and M. E. Ben-Akiva, “Activity-based disaggregate travel demand model system with activity schedules,”Transportation research part a: policy and practice, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 1–28, 2001

2001
[2]

Fuzzy logic- enhanced sustainable and resilient ev public transit systems for rural tourism,

R. Pitakaso, T. Srichok, S. Khonjun, P. Luesak, C. Kaewta, S. Gonwirat, P. Enkvetchakul, and R. Srivoramas, “Fuzzy logic- enhanced sustainable and resilient ev public transit systems for rural tourism,”IEEE Open Journal of Intelligent Transportation Systems, 2025

2025
[3]

Mobility as a service: A new model for sustainable mobility in tourism,

P. Signorile, V . Larosa, and A. Spiru, “Mobility as a service: A new model for sustainable mobility in tourism,”Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 185–200, 2018

2018
[4]

An equilibrium- seeking search algorithm for integrating large-scale activity-based and traffic assignment models,

S. Agriesti, C. Roncoli, and B.-H. Nahmias-Biran, “An equilibrium- seeking search algorithm for integrating large-scale activity-based and traffic assignment models,”IEEE Open Journal of Intelligent Transportation Systems, vol. 6, pp. 1156–1170, 2025

2025
[5]

Modeling tourist movements: A local destination analysis,

A. Lew and B. McKercher, “Modeling tourist movements: A local destination analysis,”Annals of tourism research, vol. 33, no. 2, 2006

2006
[6]

On-demand technologies for public trans- port: Insights from a melbourne survey,

S. Liyanage and H. Dia, “On-demand technologies for public trans- port: Insights from a melbourne survey,”IEEE Open Journal of Intelligent Transportation Systems, 2025

2025
[7]

Learning universal human mobility patterns with a foundation model for cross-domain data fusion,

H. Ma, X. Liao, Y . Liu, Q. Jiang, C. Stanford, S. Cao, and J. Ma, “Learning universal human mobility patterns with a foundation model for cross-domain data fusion,”Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, vol. 180, p. 105311, 2025

2025
[8]

Investigating spatial patterns and determinants of tourist attractions utilizing poi data: A case study of hubei province, china,

Y . Jiang, W. Huang, X. Xiong, B. Shu, J. Yang, M. Li, and X. Cui, “Investigating spatial patterns and determinants of tourist attractions utilizing poi data: A case study of hubei province, china,”Heliyon, vol. 10, no. 11, 2024

2024

Show all 37 references

[9]

Using user-generated content to explore the temporal heterogeneity in tourist mobility,

C. Jin, J. Cheng, and J. Xu, “Using user-generated content to explore the temporal heterogeneity in tourist mobility,”Journal of Travel Research, vol. 57, no. 6, pp. 779–791, 2018

2018
[10]

PredicTour: Predicting mobility patterns of tourists based on social media user’s profiles,

H. C. M. Senefonte, M. R. Delgado, R. L ¨uders, and T. H. Silva, “PredicTour: Predicting mobility patterns of tourists based on social media user’s profiles,”IEEE Access, vol. 10, pp. 9257–9270, 2022

2022
[11]

Profiling the us-bound chinese travelers by purpose of trip,

L. A. Cai, X. Y . Lehto, and J. O’leary, “Profiling the us-bound chinese travelers by purpose of trip,”Journal of Hospitality & Leisure Marketing, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 3–16, 2001

2001
[12]

Tracking tourists in the digital age,

N. Shoval and M. Isaacson, “Tracking tourists in the digital age,” Annals of Tourism Research, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 141–159, 2007

2007
[13]

Lstm-based deep learning model for predicting individual mobility traces of short-term foreign tourists,

A. Crivellari and E. Beinat, “Lstm-based deep learning model for predicting individual mobility traces of short-term foreign tourists,” Sustainability, vol. 12, no. 1, p. 349, 2020

2020
[14]

Large language models as urban res- idents: An llm agent framework for personal mobility generation,

J. Wang, R. Jiang, C. Yang, Z. Wu, M. Onizuka, R. Shibasaki, N. Koshizuka, and C. Xiao, “Large language models as urban res- idents: An llm agent framework for personal mobility generation,” Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol. 37, pp. 124 547–124 574, 2024

2024
[15]

Xgboost: A scalable tree boosting system,

T. Chen and C. Guestrin, “Xgboost: A scalable tree boosting system,” inProceedings of the 22nd acm sigkdd international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining, 2016, pp. 785–794

2016
[16]

Modeling tourism demand dynamics,

J. Rossell ´o, E. Aguil ´o, and A. Riera, “Modeling tourism demand dynamics,”Journal of Travel Research, vol. 44, no. 1, 2005

2005
[17]

Advanced prediction of traffic at different tem- poral scales using heterogeneous data sources,

I. G ´omez and S. Ilarri, “Advanced prediction of traffic at different tem- poral scales using heterogeneous data sources,”IEEE Open Journal of Intelligent Transportation Systems, vol. 6, pp. 1539–1550, 2025

2025
[18]

Understanding the tourist mobility using gps: Where is the next place?

W. Zheng, X. Huang, and Y . Li, “Understanding the tourist mobility using gps: Where is the next place?”Tourism Management, vol. 59, pp. 267–280, 2017

2017
[19]

Measuring tourism destinations using mobile tracking data,

J. Raun, R. Ahas, and M. Tiru, “Measuring tourism destinations using mobile tracking data,”Tourism Management, vol. 57, 2016

2016
[20]

Methodological framework for producing national tourism statistics from mobile positioning data,

E. Saluveer, J. Raun, M. Tiru, L. Altin, J. Kroon, T. Snitsarenko, A. Aasa, and S. Silm, “Methodological framework for producing national tourism statistics from mobile positioning data,”Annals of Tourism Research, vol. 81, p. 102895, 2020

2020
[21]

Nanjing’s intracity tourism flow network using cellular signaling data: A comparative analysis of residents and non-local tourists,

L. Wang, X. Wu, and Y . He, “Nanjing’s intracity tourism flow network using cellular signaling data: A comparative analysis of residents and non-local tourists,”ISPRS Int. J. Geo Inf., vol. 10, p. 674, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:244244755

2021
[22]

Tracking tourist mobility in the big data era: insights from data, theory, and future directions,

J. Chen, N. Shoval, and B. Stantic, “Tracking tourist mobility in the big data era: insights from data, theory, and future directions,”Tourism Geographies, vol. 26, no. 8, pp. 1381–1411, 2024

2024
[23]

Deepmove: Predicting human mobility with attentional recurrent networks,

J. Feng, Y . Li, C. Zhang, F. Sun, F. Meng, A. Guo, and D. Jin, “Deepmove: Predicting human mobility with attentional recurrent networks,” inProceedings of the 2018 World Wide Web Conference. Republic and Canton of Geneva, CHE: International World Wide Web Conferences Steering...

2018
[24]

Location prediction over sparse user mobility traces using rnns,

D. Yang, B. Fankhauser, P. Rosso, and P. Cudre-Mauroux, “Location prediction over sparse user mobility traces using rnns,” inProceedings of the twenty-ninth international joint conference on artificial intelli- gence, 2020, pp. 2184–2190

2020
[25]

Getnext: trajectory flow map enhanced transformer for next poi recommendation,

S. Yang, J. Liu, and K. Zhao, “Getnext: trajectory flow map enhanced transformer for next poi recommendation,” inProceedings of the 45th International ACM SIGIR Conference on research and development in information retrieval, 2022, pp. 1144–1153

2022
[26]

Trajgail: Generating urban vehicle trajectories using generative adversarial imitation learning,

S. Choi, J. Kim, and H. Yeo, “Trajgail: Generating urban vehicle trajectories using generative adversarial imitation learning,”Trans- portation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, vol. 128, 2021

2021
[27]

Traveller: Travel-pattern aware trajectory generation via autoregressive diffusion models,

Y . Luo, S. Zhang, K. Liu, Y . Xu, and L. Yin, “Traveller: Travel-pattern aware trajectory generation via autoregressive diffusion models,”In- formation Fusion, p. 103766, 2025

2025
[28]

Pedestrian vision language model for intentions prediction,

F. Munir, S. Azam, T. Mihaylova, V . Kyrki, and T. P. Kucner, “Pedestrian vision language model for intentions prediction,”IEEE Open Journal of Intelligent Transportation Systems, 2025

2025
[29]

Hu- man mobility modeling with household coordination activities under limited information via retrieval-augmented llms,

Y . Liu, X. Liao, H. Ma, B. Y . He, C. Stanford, and J. Ma, “Hu- man mobility modeling with household coordination activities under limited information via retrieval-augmented llms,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.17495, 2024

2024
[30]

Foundation models in autonomous driving: A survey on scenario generation and scenario analysis,

Y . Gao, M. Piccinini, Y . Zhang, D. Wang, K. Moller, R. Brusnicki, B. Zarrouki, A. Gambi, J. F. Totz, K. Stormset al., “Foundation models in autonomous driving: A survey on scenario generation and scenario analysis,”IEEE Open Journal of Intelligent Transportation Systems, 2026

2026
[31]

Chain- of-planned-behaviour workflow elicits few-shot mobility generation in llms,

C. Shao, F. Xu, B. Fan, J. Ding, Y . Yuan, M. Wang, and Y . Li, “Chain- of-planned-behaviour workflow elicits few-shot mobility generation in llms,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.09836, 2024

2024
[32]

Trajllm: A modular llm-enhanced agent-based framework for realistic human trajectory simulation,

C. Ju, J. Liu, S. Sinha, H. Xue, and F. Salim, “Trajllm: A modular llm-enhanced agent-based framework for realistic human trajectory simulation,” 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.18712

2025
[33]

Agentmove: A large language model based agentic framework for zero-shot next location prediction,

J. Feng, Y . Du, J. Zhao, and Y . Li, “Agentmove: A large language model based agentic framework for zero-shot next location prediction,”
[34]

Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.13986

[Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.13986
[35]

Summary of travel trends: 2017 national household travel survey,

N. McGuckin and A. Fucci, “Summary of travel trends: 2017 national household travel survey,” 2018

2017
[36]

Tokyo tourism data catalog: Survey on behavioral characteristics of foreign tourists by country/region,

Tokyo Metropolitan Government Bureau of Industrial and Labor Affairs, “Tokyo tourism data catalog: Survey on behavioral characteristics of foreign tourists by country/region,” https://data.tourism.metro.tokyo.lg.jp/en/data/, 2024, accessed: 2024

2024
[37]

Global mobility and location data provider,

Veraset, “Global mobility and location data provider,” https://www.veraset.com/, 2024, accessed: 17 June 2024

2024

Pith tools

Reviewed June 29, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Activity-based disaggregate travel demand model system with activity schedules,

J. L. Bowman and M. E. Ben-Akiva, “Activity-based disaggregate travel demand model system with activity schedules,”Transportation research part a: policy and practice, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 1–28, 2001

2001

[2] [2]

Fuzzy logic- enhanced sustainable and resilient ev public transit systems for rural tourism,

R. Pitakaso, T. Srichok, S. Khonjun, P. Luesak, C. Kaewta, S. Gonwirat, P. Enkvetchakul, and R. Srivoramas, “Fuzzy logic- enhanced sustainable and resilient ev public transit systems for rural tourism,”IEEE Open Journal of Intelligent Transportation Systems, 2025

2025

[3] [3]

Mobility as a service: A new model for sustainable mobility in tourism,

P. Signorile, V . Larosa, and A. Spiru, “Mobility as a service: A new model for sustainable mobility in tourism,”Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 185–200, 2018

2018

[4] [4]

An equilibrium- seeking search algorithm for integrating large-scale activity-based and traffic assignment models,

S. Agriesti, C. Roncoli, and B.-H. Nahmias-Biran, “An equilibrium- seeking search algorithm for integrating large-scale activity-based and traffic assignment models,”IEEE Open Journal of Intelligent Transportation Systems, vol. 6, pp. 1156–1170, 2025

2025

[5] [5]

Modeling tourist movements: A local destination analysis,

A. Lew and B. McKercher, “Modeling tourist movements: A local destination analysis,”Annals of tourism research, vol. 33, no. 2, 2006

2006

[6] [6]

On-demand technologies for public trans- port: Insights from a melbourne survey,

S. Liyanage and H. Dia, “On-demand technologies for public trans- port: Insights from a melbourne survey,”IEEE Open Journal of Intelligent Transportation Systems, 2025

2025

[7] [7]

Learning universal human mobility patterns with a foundation model for cross-domain data fusion,

H. Ma, X. Liao, Y . Liu, Q. Jiang, C. Stanford, S. Cao, and J. Ma, “Learning universal human mobility patterns with a foundation model for cross-domain data fusion,”Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, vol. 180, p. 105311, 2025

2025

[8] [8]

Investigating spatial patterns and determinants of tourist attractions utilizing poi data: A case study of hubei province, china,

Y . Jiang, W. Huang, X. Xiong, B. Shu, J. Yang, M. Li, and X. Cui, “Investigating spatial patterns and determinants of tourist attractions utilizing poi data: A case study of hubei province, china,”Heliyon, vol. 10, no. 11, 2024

2024