MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2089896716 · doi:10.1109/itst.2011.6060044

Dynamic traffic information sharing for public development and application of ITS

2011· article· en· W2089896716 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Wei Du, Wei Chen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransportation Planning and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTraffic congestionAdvanced Traffic Management SystemTransport engineeringComputer scienceFloating car dataIntelligent transportation systemService (business)Information sharingBusinessEngineeringWorld Wide WebMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dating back to late 1960s, ITS has achieved a rapid development, in which US, Japan, Canada, Germany, France and other countries throughout the world invested lots of founds and human resources. After a long time study, these countries tended to use high-tech to transform the existing road traffic and management system, which has greatly improved the quality of road network capacity and service. The implementation of these programs instead of relying mainly on the construction of more roads to meet the growing traffic demand has already aroused general concern. ITS, as a new attempt on the improvement of traffic congestion, is focusing on releasing dynamic transportation information to public, reporting traffic dynamics and guiding in travel. Facts prove that ITS may be the best way to solve the urban traffic congestion and improve traffic safety and efficiency. And this paper is trying to explore the intelligent technology working in dynamic traffic information collection, processing, analysis and dissemination of this system.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTransportation Planning and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207