MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2798049874 · doi:10.7939/r38t0m

Scheduling and Deployment Strategies for Mobile Photo Radar Enforcement

2014· article· en· W2798049874 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Xiaobin Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Alberta Library · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Geometry and Mesh Generation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoftware deploymentComputer scienceRadarScheduling (production processes)Real-time computingComputer securityTelecommunicationsEngineeringOperations management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Speeding is a leading cause of urban collisions and often causes injury and death. Consequently, photo enforcement has been globally adopted as a countermeasure in speed management and has been proved to be effective in mitigating speeding problems. Although there is extensive research pertaining to photo enforcement, there is a critical research gap regarding the development of an integrated deployment, scheduling, and evaluation process for Mobile Photo Radar Enforcement (MPRE). As a result, the objective of this thesis is to develop a framework for the MPRE program, aiming to provide planners and schedulers with a systematic and analysis-based procedure to design the MPRE program and schedule enforcement activities. The thesis used the City of Edmonton’s (CoE) current MPRE program as the basis to showcase the proposed framework. The literature relating to the theoretical basis of enforcement, the assessment of MPRE’s effects, and the deployment strategies of MPRE used in other jurisdictions was reviewed; information about the current MPRE program in the CoE was consolidated; and the historical data were collected and analyzed. Based on the collected information, a program framework was proposed, which factored in local program needs and institutional characteristics. The framework consists of three parts: a multi-variable site identification and priority-base site selection process for screening potential MPRE locations, the scheduling method for deployment of MPRE, and guidelines for program evaluation and adjustment. The framework was illustrated and tested using a numerical example. The performances of different scheduling methods proposed in the thesis were compared. Although the program framework is designed for the CoE, the systematic procedure and methodologies can be applied to MPRE programs in other jurisdictions.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.887
Threshold uncertainty score0.231

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.183 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Alberta LibrarySame topicComputational Geometry and Mesh GenerationFrench-language works237,207