MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2338353416 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2015-0371

Development and evaluation of a microscopic overtaking gap acceptance model for two-lane highways

2016· article· en· W2338353416 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Amir H. Ghods, Frank Saccomanno

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic control and management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOvertakingConsistency (knowledge bases)SimulationCollisionTransferabilityComputer scienceAggregate (composite)PerceptionTransport engineeringEngineeringArtificial intelligenceComputer securityPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A microscopic gap acceptance model is presented that simulates overtaking behavior on two-lane highways. The decision to initiate overtaking is expressed as a function of each driver’s perception of the expected time-to-collision (TTC) with the nearest opposing vehicle at the end of maneuver. The available gap is accepted if the driver’s perception of TTC exceeds a predetermined threshold for safe return (critical TTC). The gap acceptance model is calibrated and validated based on overtaking video-recording data for a two-lane highway. The overtaking gap acceptance model is then compared, for consistency and transferability, with independent aggregate field data, as well as with two other simulation models and values given in the Highway Capacity Manual for similar two-lane highways. The gap acceptance simulation demonstrated that the proposed overtaking model is able to provide reliable measures of traffic attributes for two-lane highway operation, as verified experimentally.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.572
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations11
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicTraffic control and managementFrench-language works237,207