On day t moved more frequently than a random caller on

On day t moved more frequently than a random caller on a random day in P other than t. Our estimation method of these two probabilities is detailed in S1 Supporting Information, Section SI3. An event that increases (decreases) the call volume or mobility of callers Pinometostat chemical information during day t is associated with unusually high (low) probabilities of making ore calls or moving more frequently. To identify such days in the call volume and movement frequency time series of estimated probabilities, we fit beta regression models [38] with time as the explanatory variable and the estimated probabilities as the response variable, and determine which days are positive or negative outliers based on standardized weighted residuals 2 [39]. Estimates of probabilities of making more calls and of moving more frequently are produced for a day t and a site S with respect to each reference time period of length T that day t belongs to. The behavior of callers during day t at site S could be QVD-OPH side effects classified as unusual with respect to a reference time period, or as normal with respect to another reference time period. We define the confidence probability that call or movement frequency are unusually high or low on day t as the ratio between number of times the corresponding probability estimates have been classified as positive or negative outliers and the number of reference time periods used to produce these estimates. Any day with a confidence probability less than a threshold, we use 0.05, is classified as an extreme outlier day. Figs. 6 and 7 show the time series of the two types of daily probabilities for site 361. The figures present the confidence probabilities for those days that were classified as positive or negative outliers at least once. The extreme positive and negative outliers are also shown. February 3, 2008–the day of the Lake Kivu earthquakes–is among the extreme positive outliers for both the call volume and the movement frequency measures for site 361. We note that there are more extreme negative outliers than extreme positive outliers which means that there are more days in which the call volume or movement frequency at site 361 was unusually low than days in which the call volume or movement frequency at site 361 was unusually high. In fact, a similar pattern is present in call volume and movement frequency time series associated with most of the other Rwandan sites. The output from Step 1 of our approach is a set of two time series (one for call frequency and one for movement frequency) that cover the entire study period, for each site in the study area. In our study, there were 155 sites that were active at some time during the study period, thus our output was 310 time series, together with their corresponding sets of extreme positive and negative outlier days. These are days when anomalous behavior occurred, at each site separately. This output provides no information about the spatial extent of behavioral anomalies (whether the anomaly occurred at one site or many) and the likelihood that anomalies at different sites were related or not. For this information, we continue to Step 2 of our method. Step 2: Identifying days with anomalous human behavior at multiple sites. For the second step of our approach, we create maps that display, for every day, the sites for which that day is an extreme positive or negative outlier. Figs. 2 and 3 present these maps for February 3, 2008. We construct and discuss similar maps for other days with extreme outlie.On day t moved more frequently than a random caller on a random day in P other than t. Our estimation method of these two probabilities is detailed in S1 Supporting Information, Section SI3. An event that increases (decreases) the call volume or mobility of callers during day t is associated with unusually high (low) probabilities of making ore calls or moving more frequently. To identify such days in the call volume and movement frequency time series of estimated probabilities, we fit beta regression models [38] with time as the explanatory variable and the estimated probabilities as the response variable, and determine which days are positive or negative outliers based on standardized weighted residuals 2 [39]. Estimates of probabilities of making more calls and of moving more frequently are produced for a day t and a site S with respect to each reference time period of length T that day t belongs to. The behavior of callers during day t at site S could be classified as unusual with respect to a reference time period, or as normal with respect to another reference time period. We define the confidence probability that call or movement frequency are unusually high or low on day t as the ratio between number of times the corresponding probability estimates have been classified as positive or negative outliers and the number of reference time periods used to produce these estimates. Any day with a confidence probability less than a threshold, we use 0.05, is classified as an extreme outlier day. Figs. 6 and 7 show the time series of the two types of daily probabilities for site 361. The figures present the confidence probabilities for those days that were classified as positive or negative outliers at least once. The extreme positive and negative outliers are also shown. February 3, 2008–the day of the Lake Kivu earthquakes–is among the extreme positive outliers for both the call volume and the movement frequency measures for site 361. We note that there are more extreme negative outliers than extreme positive outliers which means that there are more days in which the call volume or movement frequency at site 361 was unusually low than days in which the call volume or movement frequency at site 361 was unusually high. In fact, a similar pattern is present in call volume and movement frequency time series associated with most of the other Rwandan sites. The output from Step 1 of our approach is a set of two time series (one for call frequency and one for movement frequency) that cover the entire study period, for each site in the study area. In our study, there were 155 sites that were active at some time during the study period, thus our output was 310 time series, together with their corresponding sets of extreme positive and negative outlier days. These are days when anomalous behavior occurred, at each site separately. This output provides no information about the spatial extent of behavioral anomalies (whether the anomaly occurred at one site or many) and the likelihood that anomalies at different sites were related or not. For this information, we continue to Step 2 of our method. Step 2: Identifying days with anomalous human behavior at multiple sites. For the second step of our approach, we create maps that display, for every day, the sites for which that day is an extreme positive or negative outlier. Figs. 2 and 3 present these maps for February 3, 2008. We construct and discuss similar maps for other days with extreme outlie.