Online Method to Impute Missing Loop Detector Data for Urban Freeway Traffic Control
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The dual loop detector provides input data for real-time traffic control. However, the common scenario of missing or invalid loop data samples negatively impacts the performance of the subsequent traffic control or traffic prediction model. This paper describes a method that detects blank data samples when a new data record is listed, then imputes missing data samples to form a complete data record in real time. One three-lane loop detector station on Whitemud Drive in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, is used as a case study to verify the algorithms. The imputation scope for this study involves diagnosing and filling in the missing data of one lane for at least one whole day at a specific loop station. The diagnosis of missing data for both volume and speed measurements is based on data records from upstream and downstream stations, rather than from single samples. The imputation algorithm for volume and density data models the relationship of one loop detector with all other loop detectors at the same station as linear. The multiple linear regression algorithm is applied to full historic data offline to learn the linear relationship between loops at the same station, and the online data imputation is based on the equations learned. Two other commonly used imputation techniques—pairwise linear regression and the average of the surrounding detectors—are also conducted for comparison. The proposed diagnosis and imputation method enables the loop data input to support control models with high frequency and large data requirements.
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 | 0.004 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".