MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2545826862 · doi:10.1002/atr.1425

Multiclass fuzzy user equilibrium with endogenous membership functions and risk‐taking behaviors

2016· article· en· W2545826862 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohammad Miralinaghi, Yingyan Lou, Yu‐Ting Hsu, Ramin Shabanpour, Yousef Shafahi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransportation Planning and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceBounded rationalityMathematical optimizationFuzzy logicCalibrationBounded functionData miningMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Over the last decades, several approaches have been proposed in the literature to incorporate users' perceptions of travel costs, their bounded rationality, and risk‐taking behaviors into network equilibrium modeling for traffic assignment problem. While theoretically advanced, these models often suffer from high complexity and computational cost and often involve parameters that are difficult to estimate. This study proposes an alternative approach where users' imprecise perceptions of travel times are endogenously constructed as fuzzy sets based on the probability distributions of random link travel times. Two decision rules are proposed accordingly to account for users' heterogeneous risk‐taking behaviors, that is, optimistic and pessimistic rules. The proposed approach, namely, the multiclass fuzzy user equilibrium, can be formulated as a link‐based variational inequality model. The model can be solved efficiently, and parameters involved can be either easily estimated or treated as factors for calibration against observed traffic flow data. Numerical examples show that the proposed model can be solved efficiently even for a large‐scale network of Mashhad, Iran, with 2538 links and 7157 origin–destination pairs. The example also illustrates the calibration capability of the proposed model, highlighting that the model is able to produce much more accurate flow estimates compared with the Wardropian user equilibrium model. 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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations25
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicTransportation Planning and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207