MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2924322295 · doi:10.1049/iet-its.2018.5451

Cellular automaton simulation of vehicles in the contraflow left‐turn lane at signalised intersections

2019· article· en· W2924322295 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIET Intelligent Transport Systems · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic control and management
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Education and Child Care
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCellular automatonComputer scienceSimulationTurn (biochemistry)AutomatonTransport engineeringEngineeringArtificial intelligencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To improve the capacity of signalised intersections for left‐turn vehicles, an unconventional left‐turn design named the contraflow left‐turn lane is applied at intersections in several cities of China. The main concept of the design is to provide more capacity for left‐turn vehicles by dynamically making use of the adjacent opposite lanes. In this study, a cellular automaton model that simulates left‐turn traffic flow at a signalised intersection with a contraflow left‐turn lane was developed and verified by field data. Rules for vehicles entering the contraflow left‐turn lane were proposed, and various factors including the vehicle type, driver type, and the ratio of U‐turn vehicles were considered. The simulation results showed that the contraflow left‐turn lane could increase the capacity of the intersection and decrease the delay of left‐turn vehicles. Also, the optimal match between the length of the contraflow left‐turn lane and the duration of the pre‐signal green light can be evaluated via simulation. This study can provide a reference for the actual application of contraflow left‐turn lanes.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.525

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.189 · 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