MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139410611 · doi:10.3141/1776-06

Defining Freeway Capacity as Function of Breakdown Probability

2001· article· en· W2139410611 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Matt R. Lorenz, Lily Elefteriadou

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic control and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistère des TransportsMcMaster University
KeywordsBottleneckProbabilistic logicHighway Capacity ManualTransport engineeringTraffic volumeStatistical modelTraffic flow (computer networking)Probabilistic analysis of algorithmsComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceEngineeringLevel of serviceMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The need for an enhanced freeway capacity definition that incorporates the probabilistic nature of the freeway breakdown process is addressed. This is investigated through an extensive analysis of speed and volume data collected at two freeway bottleneck sites in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. At each site, the freeway breakdown process was examined in detail for more than 40 congestion events occurring during the course of nearly 20 days. Preliminary models were developed for each site. These models are used to describe the probability of breakdown versus the observed flow rate and to examine the implications that this probabilistic approach to breakdown has on the current definition of freeway capacity. A revised, probabilistic freeway capacity definition is proposed for use in future editions of the Highway Capacity Manual.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.008
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations169
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research BoardSame topicTraffic control and managementFrench-language works237,207