MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134115685 · doi:10.1139/l10-115

Estimation of expected travel time using the method of moment

2011· article· en· W2134115685 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lu Sun, Wenjun Gu, Hani S. Mahmassani

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransportation Planning and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMoment (physics)Monte Carlo methodPiecewiseRange (aeronautics)Computer scienceTrajectorySecond moment of areaExpected valueVariance (accounting)Travel timeRandom variableTime pointMathematical optimizationStatisticsMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Daily travel time is cast into a framework of nonstationary stochastic process. For a fixed value of departure time in a day, travel time given origin, destination, and route information, is treated as a random variable. For a specific date, travel time is treated as a deterministic function of departure time t. Under this framework, the expected travel time for a given departure time is defined as an ensemble mean travel time (EMTT) over a number of days. The method of moment is proposed to compute EMTT based on a hypothetical piecewise constant speed trajectory for travel time estimation. The advantage of the method of moment for EMTT estimation is that it only requires ensemble mean and ensemble variance of spot speed information at point detectors, which is much easier and cost-effective to get than obtaining collections of massive spot speed data per se. The result is compared against Monte Carlo simulation and direct sampling based simulation. The proposed method of moment approach provides accurate estimation of EMTT (e.g., the expected travel time estimation) under a wide range of traffic conditions (e.g., free flow and congestion).

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)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.996
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations16
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicTransportation Planning and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207