MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2329320394 · doi:10.1061/40996(330)514

Disaggregate Model on Drivers' Route Choice Behavior under Traffic State Information

2009· article· en· W2329320394 on OpenAlexaff
Shoupeng Tang, Meiping Yun, Xiaoguang Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueLogistics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransportation Planning and Optimization
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Education and Child Care
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsComputer scienceLogitRationalityHomogeneousMixed logitNested logitState (computer science)Logistic regressionTransport engineeringTravel behaviorEconometricsOperations researchEngineeringEconomicsMachine learningMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When reviewing on route choice models, most literature supposes that all drivers share the same standards of understanding and assessing the traffic conditions and have a homogeneous route choice behavior reacting to the same real-time traffic state information. But there is a great dissimilarity between the real traffic system and this hypothesis. In this paper the authors considered the above dissimilarity and adopted a logit model to describe the drivers' route choice behavior under real-time traffic state information. When modeling, each driver's characteristics are taken into account. These characteristics include gender, age, income, familiarity with the road network, trip purpose and so on. Finally, by analyzing SP and RP survey data in the Shanghai urban expressway A20, the authors proved the validity and rationality of the established logit model.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLogisticsSame topicTransportation Planning and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207