MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2110922472 · doi:10.1002/atr.177

Distributed computing approaches for large‐scale probit‐based stochastic user equilibrium problems

2011· article· en· W2110922472 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
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransportation Planning and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonte Carlo methodComputer scienceProbitStochastic simulationMathematical optimizationWorkloadPath (computing)MathematicsMachine learningStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY Applications of probit‐based stochastic user equilibrium (SUE) principle on large‐scale networks have been largely limited because of the overwhelming computational burden in solving its stochastic network loading problem. A two‐stage Monte Carlo simulation method is recognized to have satisfactory accuracy level when solving this stochastic network loading. This paper thus works on the acceleration of the Monte Carlo simulation method via using distributed computing system. Three distributed computing approaches are then adopted on the workload partition of the Monte Carlo simulation method. Wherein, the first approach allocates each processor in the distributed computing system to solve each trial of the simulation in parallel and in turns, and the second approach assigns all the processors to solve the shortest‐path problems in one trial of the Monte Carlo simulation concurrently. The third approach is a combination of the first two, wherein both different trials of the Monte Carlo simulation as well as the shortest path problems in one trial are solved simultaneously. Performances of the three approaches are comprehensively tested by the Sioux‐Falls network and then a randomly generated network example. It shows that computational time for the probit‐based SUE problem can be largely reduced by any of these three approaches, and the first approach is found out to be superior to the other two. The first approach is then selected to calculate the probit‐based SUE problem on a large‐scale network example. 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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.869
Threshold uncertainty score0.465

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.276
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