MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016903344 · doi:10.1080/03081060802364505

Imputation of Missing Traffic Data during Holiday Periods

2008· article· en· W2016903344 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Planning and Technology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic Prediction and Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Regina
KeywordsAdaptabilityImputation (statistics)Transport engineeringComputer scienceParametric statisticsData collectionRegressionMissing dataData miningEngineeringStatisticsMathematicsMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Highway and transportation agencies implement large-scale traffic monitoring programs to fulfill the planning, operation and management needs of highway systems. These monitoring programs typically use inductive loops as detectors to collect traffic data. Because of the harsh environment in which they operate, they are highly prone to malfunctioning and providing erroneous or missing data. If this occurs during holiday periods when the increase in highway traffic is often substantial, there is a good chance that traffic peaking and variation will be underestimated. This paper discusses the adaptability of available imputation techniques for holiday traffic and then introduces a new procedure using non-parametric regression – the k-nearest neighbor (k-NN) method. It is found that the performance of the k-NN method is consistent and reasonable for different holidays and types of highway. In addition, it is also concluded that the data requirements for this method are flexible.

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.

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 score0.508
Threshold uncertainty score0.377

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.218 · 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