MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2743768825 · doi:10.1155/2017/6937385

Predicting Freeway Work Zone Delays and Costs with a Hybrid Machine-Learning Model

2017· article· en· W2743768825 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bo Du, Steven Chien, Joyoung Lee, Lazar Spasovic

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic control and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNew Jersey Department of TransportationU.S. Department of Transportation
KeywordsWork zoneScheduleSupport vector machineWork (physics)Artificial neural networkMean squared errorComputer scienceIncentiveWork scheduleMachine learningArtificial intelligenceTransport engineeringOperations researchSimulationEngineeringStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A hybrid machine-learning model, integrating an artificial neural network (ANN) and a support vector machine (SVM) model, is developed to predict spatiotemporal delays, subject to road geometry, number of lane closures, and work zone duration in different periods of a day and in the days of a week. The model is very user friendly, allowing the least inputs from the users. With that the delays caused by a work zone on any location of a New Jersey freeway can be predicted. To this end, tremendous amounts of data from different sources were collected to establish the relationship between the model inputs and outputs. A comparative analysis was conducted, and results indicate that the proposed model outperforms others in terms of the least root mean square error (RMSE). The proposed hybrid model can be used to calculate contractor penalty in terms of cost overruns as well as incentive reward schedule in case of early work competition. Additionally, it can assist work zone planners in determining the best start and end times of a work zone for developing and evaluating traffic mitigation and management plans.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.536
Threshold uncertainty score0.326

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Citations27
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicTraffic control and managementFrench-language works237,207