MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097223009 · doi:10.1002/atr.172

Stochastic modeling of the equilibrium speed–density relationship

2011· article· en· W2097223009 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic control and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Massachusetts Amherst
KeywordsProbabilistic logicRepresentation (politics)DiagramTraffic flow (computer networking)Computer scienceFlow (mathematics)Mathematical modelStochastic modellingVariety (cybernetics)Work (physics)Stochastic processStatistical physicsMathematical economicsMathematical optimizationIndustrial engineeringOperations researchMathematicsEngineeringArtificial intelligencePhysicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY As the graphical and mathematical representation of relationships among traffic flow, speed, and density, the fundamental diagram has been the foundation of traffic flow theory and transportation engineering. Underlying the fundamental diagram is the speed–density relationship which was originally documented in Greenshields' seminal work and followed by a variety of equilibrium models over the past 75 years. Observed in these efforts was their deterministic nature striving to pursue two seemingly competing goals: mathematical elegance and empirical accuracy, the former of which is attractive to mathematical modeling of traffic dynamics, and the latter is required if such modeling is meant to be realistic. As a continued effort of such a pursuit, this paper presents a stochastic speed–density model. The motivation is twofold: first, it is desirable to have a model which achieves both goals reasonably and second, the stochastic model can potentially lead to probabilistic traffic flow modeling and prediction which is typically not offered by a macroscopic approach. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.847
Threshold uncertainty score0.181

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.188 · 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