MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135963782 · doi:10.1002/atr.144

Maneuvers of motorcycles in queues at signalized intersections

2010· article· en· W2135963782 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chu Cong Minh, Kazushi Sano, Shoji Matsumoto

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic and Road Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQueuePopulationComputer scienceSimulationCurrent (fluid)EstimationTransport engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The maneuvering models of motorcycles in previous studies often considered motorcycles' traveling in terms of movements in a physical static lane and not in terms of dynamic virtual lane‐based movements. For that reason, these models are not able to imitate motorcyclists' behavior well. This paper proposes a maneuverability model framework for motorcycles in queues at signalized intersections with considering the dynamic motorcycle's lane. The model includes (i) a dynamic motorcycle's lane to identify the current, left, and right lanes of the subject motorcycle, (ii) a threshold distance to determine when a motorcyclist starts to consider maneuvering, (iii) a lane selection model to identify the lane preferred by a motorcyclist, and (iv) a gap acceptance model to describe whether or not the lead and lag gaps are acceptable for maneuvering. The model framework captures the variation across the motorcyclist population and over time observations. The models were applied to Hanoi and Hochiminh city, Vietnam, based on microscopic data collected from video images. All of the parameters were estimated using the maximum likelihood method with the statistical estimation software GAUSS. The results show that 77.88% of the observed maneuvers – either staying in the current lane or turning left or right – could be modeled correctly by the proposed models. Copyright © 2010 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.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score0.233

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations41
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicTraffic and Road SafetyFrench-language works237,207