Traffic balancing-based path recommendation mechanisms in vehicular networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we propose both reactive and proactive balancing traffic path recommendation mechanisms, which we refer to as Bal-Traf and Abs-Bal, respectively. Bal-Traf is initiated when a certain output road segment located at any road intersection is detected in an overloaded situation. In the event that the existing traffic density of any output road exceeds its optimal capacity, Bal-Traf recommends that those vehicles that plan to pass over this road segment as next hop choose another, less congested output road segment. On the other hand, Abs-Bal is a proactive balancing traffic mechanism. Its main purpose is to distribute input traffic completely even among all output road segments at intersections. Moreover, Abs-Bal considers the best travel time of vehicles in addition to the goal of balancing traffic. From the experimental results, we can see that Bal-Traf eliminates the number of overwhelmed road segments over the road network in scenarios with only partial network congestion. It also decreases the number of congested road segments in scenarios with complete network congestion. However, it increases the density drastically over the remaining congested road segments in these scenarios. Abs-Bal performs well in decreasing the percentage of congested road segments and balancing traffic among road segments located throughout the road network, in the event of complete network congestion.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".