MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Statistical and Genetic Algorithms Classification of Highways

2001· article· en· W1977885105 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Pawan Lingras

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Transportation Engineering · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks and Applications
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Regina
KeywordsGenetic algorithmComputer scienceTraffic volumeVolume (thermodynamics)AlgorithmData miningStatisticsMachine learningMathematicsEngineeringTransport engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper reports the results of experiments comparing a conventional statistical method and an evolutionary genetic algorithms approach for classifying highway sections that is based on temporal traffic patterns. Traffic patterns are used as surrogates of two important characteristics of a highway section, namely, trip purpose and trip length distribution. Accurate classification can lead to better traffic analyses, such as estimations of annual average daily traffic volume and design hourly traffic volume, and determination of maintenance and upgrading schedules. Modern-day computers cannot solve the problem of obtaining optimal classification corresponding to minimum within-group error. The hierarchical grouping method provides a reasonable approximation of the optimal solution. However, for smaller numbers of groups, the hierarchical approach tends to move farther away from the optimal solution. The genetic algorithms based approach provides better results when the number of groups is relatively small (e.g., less than nine for the Alberta highway network). In addition to comparing the two methods, the results of additional experiments studying the characteristics of the genetic approach are included.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 designSimulation 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
Published2001
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Transportation EngineeringSame topicNeural Networks and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207