MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1884033814 · doi:10.1002/atr.1254

A study of the influence of severe environmental conditions on common traffic congestion features

2013· article· en· W1884033814 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hubert Rehborn, Micha Koller

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic control and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTraffic congestionTransport engineeringEnvironmental scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY On the basis of real traffic and environmental data measured on German freeways, we studied common features of traffic congestion under the influence of severe weather conditions. We have found that traffic features [J] and [S] defining traffic phases “wide moving jam” (J) and “synchronized flow” (S) in Kerner's three‐phase theory are indeed common spatiotemporal traffic features. The quantitative parameters for both traffic phases [S] and [J] were investigated in a comparison of “ideal” weather conditions (good visibility and no precipitation) and severe weather situations (icy road, wind, precipitation, etc.). We showed spatiotemporal congested patterns in several space–time diagrams based on the Automatic Tracking of Moving Jams/Forecasting of Traffic Objects (ASDA/FOTO) model reconstruction for roadside detectors. A statistical study of traffic phase [J] parameters was presented, showing the average values and standard deviation of the quantities. Similarities and differences were analyzed, and some consequences for vehicular applications were discussed to cope with severe weather conditions. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Simulation or modelinglow
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.995
Threshold uncertainty score0.214

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.003
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.192 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designObservational · Simulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations33
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicTraffic control and managementFrench-language works237,207