A new logit‐artificial neural network ensemble for mode choice modeling: a case study for border transport
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Logit model is one of the statistical techniques commonly used for mode choice modeling, while artificial neural network (ANN) is a very popular type of artificial intelligence technique used for mode choice modeling. Ensemble learning has evolved to be very effective approach to enhance the performance for many applications through integration of different models. In spite of this advantage, the use of ANN‐based ensembles in mode choice modeling is under explored. The focus of this study is to investigate the use of aforementioned techniques for different number of transportation modes and predictor variables. This study proposes a logit‐ANN ensemble for mode choice modeling and investigates its efficiency in different situations. Travel between Khobar‐Dammam metropolitan area of Saudi Arabia and Kingdom of Bahrain is selected for mode choice modeling. The travel on this route can be performed mainly by air travel or private vehicle through King Fahd causeway. The results show that the proposed ensemble gives consistently better accuracies than single models for multinomial choice problems irrespective of number of input variables. Copyright © 2015 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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it