<|begin_of_text|><|start_header_id|>system<|end_header_id|>You are an expert on climate change, human mobility and migration. Answer the question truthfully.<|eot_id|><|start_header_id|>user<|end_header_id|>Here are the title and abstract of a scientific paper probably related to climate change, human mobility and migration..
Title:"Error Measures for Trajectory Estimations With Geo-Tagged Mobility Sample Data."
Abstract:"Although geo-tagged mobility data (e.g., cell phone data and social media data) can be potentially used to estimate individual space-time travel trajectories, they often have low sample rates that only tell travelers' whereabouts at the sparse sample times while leaving the remaining activities to be estimated with interpolation. This paper proposes a set of time geography-based measures to quantify the accuracy of the trajectory estimation in a robust manner. A series of measures including activity bandwidth and normalized activity bandwidth are proposed to quantify the possible absolute and relative error ranges between the estimated and the ground truth trajectories that cannot be observed. These measures can be used to evaluate the suitability of the estimated individual trajectories from sparsely sampled geo-tagged mobility data for travel mobility analysis. We suggest cutoff values of these measures to separate useful data with low estimation errors and noisy data with high estimation errors. We conduct theoretical analysis to show that these error measures decrease with sample rates and peoples' activity ranges. We also propose a lookup table-based interpolation method to expedite the computational time. The proposed measures have been applied to 2013 geo-tagged tweet data in New York City, USA, and 2014 cell-phone data in Shenzhen, China. The results illustrate that the proposed measures can provide estimation error ranges for exceptionally large datasets in much shorter times than the benchmark method without using lookup tables. These results also reveal managerial results into the quality of these data for human mobility studies, including their distribution patterns.."
I have six questions you need to answer.
Q1: Is this article is about 'human migration mobility': 1 = yes; 0 = no. Answer with a number. Do not give a textual explanation.

Q2: What drivers of migration and mobility does the article study? 0 = 'other', 1 = 'climate', 2 = 'environment', 3 = 'economic', 4 = 'conflict', 5 = 'political', 6 = 'social', 7 = 'family'. Answer with a number or a sequence of numbers separated by commas. Do not give a textual explanation. 

Q3: What is the overall sentiment of the article?:0 = 'neutral', 1 = 'negative', 2 = 'positive'. Answer with a number. Do not give a textual explanation.

Q4: What type of climate or environmental keywords are explicitly mentioned?:  0 = 'none', 1 = 'algal blooms', 2 = 'infestation', 3 = 'infectious diseases', 4 = 'ocean acidification', 5 = 'sea ice', 6 = 'acid rain', 7 = 'drought', 8 = 'cold wave', 9 = 'heat wave', 10 = 'glacial', 11 = 'wildfire', 12 = 'air pollution', 13 = 'biodiversity loss', 14 = 'coastal erosion', 15 = 'land degradation', 16 = 'deforestation', 17 = 'desertification', 18 = 'water pollution', 19 = 'diebacks', 20 = 'permafrost loss', 21 = 'sand mining', 22 = 'sea level rise', 23 = 'earthquake', 24 = 'tsunami', 25 = 'volcanic', 26 = 'flood', 27 = 'avalanche', 28 = 'landslide', 29 = 'downburst', 30 = 'thunderstorm', 31 = 'sandstorm', 32 = 'haze', 33 = 'storm', 34 = 'cyclone', 35 = 'blizzard', 36 = 'hail', 37 = 'snow', 38 = 'tornado', 39 = 'wind', 40 = 'hurricane', 41 = 'typhoon', 42 = 'other'. Answer with a number or a sequence of numbers separated by commas. Do not give a textual explanation. 

Q5: What discipline does the article belong to?: 0 = 'other', 1 = 'social science', 2 = 'natural science', 3 = 'arts and humanities', 4 = 'multidiscipline and interdiscipline'. Answer with a number. Do not give a textual explanation.

Q6: Does the article apply quantitative and/or statistical analysis?: 0 = 'no', 1 = 'yes'. Answer with a number. Do not give a textual explanation.

Use the following template: 

Q1 = [];
Q2 = [];
Q3 = [];
Q4 = [];
Q5 = [];
Q6 = [].<|eot_id|><|start_header_id|>assistant<|end_header_id|>Answer:
Q1 = [1];
Q2 = [];
Q3 = [];
Q4 = [0];
Q5 = [];
Q6 = [1].
Error Measures for Trajectory Estimations With Geo-Tagged Mobility Sample Data
Although geo-tagged mobility data (e.g., cell phone data and social media data) can be potentially used to estimate individual space-time travel trajectories, they often have low sample rates that only tell travelers' whereabouts at the sparse sample times while leaving the remaining activities to be estimated with interpolation. This paper proposes a set of time geography-based measures to quantify the accuracy of the trajectory estimation in a robust manner. A series of measures including activity bandwidth and normalized activity bandwidth are proposed to quantify the possible absolute and relative error ranges between the estimated and the ground truth trajectories that cannot be observed. These measures can be used to evaluate the suitability of the estimated individual trajectories from sparsely sampled geo-tagged mobility data for travel mobility analysis. We suggest cutoff values of these measures to separate useful data with low estimation errors and noisy data with high estimation errors. We conduct theoretical analysis to show that these error measures decrease with sample rates and peoples' activity ranges. We also propose a lookup table-based interpolation method to expedite the computational time. The proposed measures have been applied to 2013 geo-tagged tweet data in New York City, USA, and 2014 cell-phone data in Shenzhen, China. The results illustrate that the proposed measures can provide estimation error ranges for exceptionally large datasets in much shorter times than the benchmark method without using lookup tables. These results also reveal managerial results into the quality of these data for human mobility studies, including their distribution patterns.