MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1901137330 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2014-0464

Proof-of-concept for methodological framework to evaluate operational strategies with travel demand models

2015· article· en· W1901137330 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jiaqi Ma, Changju Lee, M J Demetsky

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransportation Planning and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersVirginia Department of Transportation
KeywordsSoftware deploymentOperational planningComputer scienceOperations researchProcess (computing)TollKey (lock)Transport engineeringFlow networkTraffic flow (computer networking)OccupancyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently, limited available resources for physical capacity expansion have generated supports for short-term operational improvements. Yet, only a few studies have dealt with evaluating these operational strategies effectively within the traditional transportation planning process even though suitable operational strategies impact to not only specific corridors or regions but also the whole transportation network. This is because it is generally perceived that integrating travel demand models with operational analysis approaches is quite difficult due to different constraints, modeling structures, and required data sets. In this regard, the concept of methodological framework to evaluate operational strategies with travel demand models is developed and validated by the proper case study (i.e., high occupancy toll lanes deployment in the Hampton Roads area in Virginia, US) in this research. The proposed framework consists of three major components: (i) the selection of an appropriate operational analysis approach, (ii) the disaggregation of daily traffic volumes to peak period volumes, and (iii) the alignment of modeling elements between the travel demand model and operational tool. Key contributions from this research are that (i) the proposed methodology enables the evaluation of travel behavioral changes without microscopic simulation, especially in terms of capturing network flow pattern changes caused by behavioral shifts after operational strategy deployment, (ii) the proposed framework eliminates assumptions required when only operational tools are used to evaluate operational strategies, (iii) the disaggregation method of a daily trip distribution matrix into peak period matrices by using survey data are developed, (iv) specific details influencing integration in terms of data types, peak period link capacity, volume-delay functions, and link impedance are identified. Consequently, even though this research still has some limitations (e.g., inherent weakness of travel demand models), this can be a starting point to develop more detailed guidelines as well as a good reference for practitioners and researchers who wish to evaluate operation strategies within transportation planning process.

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

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.090

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicTransportation Planning and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207