MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1993422730 · doi:10.1109/ds-rt.2012.38

An Offline Road Network Partitioning Solution in Distributed Transportation Simulation

2012· article· en· W1993422730 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yan Xu, Gary Tan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVLSI and FPGA Design Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScalabilityGraph partitionComputer scienceFlow networkGraphSpace partitioningDistributed computingPartition (number theory)Graph theoryTheoretical computer scienceAlgorithmMathematical optimizationDatabaseMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Offline road network partitioning is the first step to space-parallel distributed transportation simulation. Currently, METIS is the most popular offline road network partitioning solution, but it cannot naturally formalize data distribution in various ITS applications, and cannot guarantee to minimize data exchanges between partitions. This paper introduces a hyper graph-based offline road network partitioning solution, which is suitable for future distributed transportation simulations with ITS applications. In [10], we proposed to formalize offline road network partitioning as a hyper graph partitioning problem, which makes it possible to minimize data exchanges between partitions. We then solved the hyper graph partitioning problem using hMETIS, a graph partitioning algorithm borrowed from Very Large Scale Integration (VLSI) applications. In this paper, our experiments based on Singapore road network showed that the hyper graph-based road network partitioning with ITS applications reduces data exchanges between partitions. We observed two features in data distributions in some ITS applications, which led us to develop the biased first choice (BFC) coarsening schema. Experiments show that BFC further reduces data exchanges between partitions. For distributed transportation simulations, where there are large amounts of data exchanged between partitions, especially by ITS applications, our proposal is one candidate solution to reduce the simulation time and increase the scalability.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.236 · 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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVLSI and FPGA Design TechniquesFrench-language works237,207