Use of <i>n</i>-Fold Cross-Validation to Evaluate Three Methods to Calculate Heavy Truck Annual Average Daily Traffic and Vehicle Miles Traveled
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reliable estimates of heavy-truck volumes in the United States are important in a number of transportation applications including pavement design and management, traffic safety, and traffic operations. Additionally, because heavy vehicles emit pollutants at much higher rates than passenger vehicles, reliable volume estimates are critical to computing accurate inventories of on-road emissions. Accurate baseline inventories are also necessary to forecast future scenarios. The research presented in this paper evaluated three different methods commonly used by transportation agencies to estimate annual average daily traffic (AADT), which is used to determine vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Traffic data from continuous count stations provided by the Iowa Department of Transportation were used to estimate AADT for single-unit and multiunit trucks for rural freeways and rural primary highways using the three methods. The first method developed general expansion factors, which apply to all vehicles. AADT, representing all vehicles, was estimated for short-term counts and was multiplied by statewide average truck volumes for the corresponding roadway type to obtain AADT for each truck category. The second method also developed general expansion factors and AADT estimates. Truck AADT for the second method was calculated by multiplying the general AADT by truck volumes from the short-term counts. The third method developed expansion factors specific to each truck group. AADT estimates for each truck group were estimated from short-term counts using corresponding expansion factors. Accuracy of the three methods was determined by comparing actual AADT from count station data to estimates from the three methods. Accuracy of the three methods was compared using n-fold cross-validation. Mean squared error of prediction was used to estimate the difference between estimated and actual AADT. Prediction error was lowest for the method that developed separate expansion factors for trucks. Implications for emissions estimation using the different methods are also discussed.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".