MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2519355426 · doi:10.1002/atr.1414

Development of a driving cycle for Colombo, Sri Lanka: an economical approach for developing countries

2016· article· en· W2519355426 on OpenAlex
Uditha Galgamuwa, Loshaka Perera, Saman Bandara

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicle emissions and performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRepresentativeness heuristicSri lankaTRIPS architectureSample (material)Data collectionMarkov chainTransport engineeringComputer scienceDriving cycleSelection (genetic algorithm)Operations researchEngineeringGeographyStatisticsMathematicsArtificial intelligenceMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Financial constraints and lack of availability of traffic‐related information significantly hinder the development of driving cycles in developing countries. This paper proposes an economical, practical, accurate methodology for the development of driving cycles, including the development of a driving cycle for Colombo, Sri Lanka. The proposed methodology captures regional traffic and road conditions and selects a model that represents the collected data sample with minimum available traffic‐related information. Existing methods were modified for route selection by dividing routes into links using nodes or physical junctions to minimize the number of trips required for data collection. Speed–time data for respective links were used to reconstruct speed–time profiles of identified origin–destination pairs. The on‐board method was used for data collection, and the Markov chain theory was used to develop a transition probability matrix of state changes. An additional matrix was introduced to the existing method to improve model representativeness to the collected data sample. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.465
Threshold uncertainty score0.230

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.233 · 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