MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113715734 · doi:10.3141/1710-25

Delay Variability at Signalized Intersections

2000· article· en· W2113715734 on OpenAlexafffund
Liping Fu, Bruce Hellinga

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransportation Planning and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsIntersection (aeronautics)Signal timingRandomnessPercentileVariance (accounting)Computer scienceVariation (astronomy)Level of serviceSimulationStatisticsTransport engineeringEngineeringTraffic signalMathematicsReal-time computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Delays that individual vehicles may experience at a signalized intersection are usually subject to large variation because of the randomness of traffic arrivals and interruption caused by traffic signal controls. Although such variation may have important implications for the planning, design, and analysis of signal controls, currently no analytical model is available to quantify it. The development of an analytical model for predicting the variance of overall delay is described. The model is constructed on the basis of the delay evolution patterns under two extreme traffic conditions: highly undersaturated and highly oversaturated conditions. A discrete cycle-by-cycle simulation model is used to generate data for calibrating and validating the proposed model. The practical implications of the model are demonstrated through its use in determining optimal cycle times with respect to delay variability and in assessing level of service according to the percentiles of overall delay.

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)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.322 · 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

Citations77
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research BoardSame topicTransportation Planning and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207