Cognitive Connected Vehicle Information System Design Requirement for Safety: Role of Bayesian Artificial Intelligence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intelligent transportation systems (ITS) are gaining acceptance around the world and the connected vehicle component of ITS is recognized as a high priority research and development area in many technologically advanced countries. Connected vehicles are expected to have the capability of safe, efficient and eco-driving operations whether these are under human control or in the adaptive machine control mode of operations. The race is on to design the capability to operate in connected traffic environment. The operational requirements can be met with cognitive vehicle design features made possible by advances in artificial intelligence-supported methodology, improved understanding of human factors, and advances in communication technology. This paper describes cognitive features and their information system requirements. The architecture of an information system is presented that supports the features of the cognitive connected vehicle. For better focus, information processing capabilities are specified and the role of Bayesian artificial intelligence is defined for data fusion. Example applications illustrate the role of information systems in integrating intelligent technology, Bayesian artificial intelligence, and abstracted human factors. Concluding remarks highlight the role of the information system and Bayesian artificial intelligence in the design of a new generation of cognitive connected vehicle.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".