MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2091826738 · doi:10.3141/1856-10

GAID: Genetic Adaptive Incident Detection for Freeways

2003· article· en· W2091826738 on OpenAlexafffund
Prasenjit Roy, Baher Abdulhai

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic Prediction and Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of California, IrvineMinistère des TransportsMcMaster University
KeywordsComputer scienceGenetic algorithmConstant false alarm rateArtificial neural networkDetectorProbabilistic logicAlgorithmSmoothingData miningArtificial intelligenceReal-time computingPattern recognition (psychology)Machine learningComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Extensive research on point-detector-based automatic traffic-impeding incident detection indicates the potential superiority of neural networks over conventional approaches. All approaches, however, including neural networks, produce detection algorithms that are location specific—that is, neither transferable nor adaptive. A recently designed and ready-to-implement freeway incident detection algorithm based on genetically optimized probabilistic neural networks (PNN) is presented. The combined use of genetic algorithms and neural networks produces GAID, a genetic adaptive incident detection logic that uses flow and occupancy values from the upstream and downstream loop detector stations to automatically detect an incident between the said stations. As input, GAID uses modified input feature space based on the difference of the present volume and occupancy condition from the average condition for time and location. On the output side, it uses a Bayesian update process and converts isolated binary outputs into a continuous probabilistic measure—that is, updated every time step. GAID implements genetically optimized separate smoothing parameters for its input variables, which in turn increase the overall generalization accuracy of the detector algorithm. The detector was subjected to off-line tests with real incident data from a number of freeways in California. Results and further comparison with the McMaster algorithm indicate that GAID with a PNN core has a better detection rate and a lower false alarm rate than the PNN alone and the well-established McMaster algorithm. Results also indicate that the algorithm is the least location specific, and the automated genetic optimization process makes it adapt to new site conditions.

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 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)0.003
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 score0.693
Threshold uncertainty score0.895

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations23
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research BoardSame topicTraffic Prediction and Management TechniquesFrench-language works237,207