Estimating Traffic Volume on Minor Roads at Rural Stop-Controlled Intersections using Deep Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Safety Performance Functions (SPFs) are regression models used to predict the expected number of collisions as a function of various traffic and geometric characteristics. One of the integral components in developing SPFs is the availability of accurate exposure factors, that is, annual average daily traffic (AADT). However, AADTs are not often available for minor roads at rural intersections. This study aims to develop a robust AADT estimation model using a deep neural network. A total of 1,350 rural four-legged, stop-controlled intersections from the Province of Alberta, Canada, were used to train the neural network. The results of the deep neural network model were compared with the traditional estimation method, which uses linear regression. The results indicated that the deep neural network model improved the estimation of minor roads’ AADT by 35% when compared with the traditional method. Furthermore, SPFs developed using linear regression resulted in models with statistically insignificant AADTs on minor roads. Conversely, the SPF developed using the neural network provided a better fit to the data with both AADTs on minor and major roads being statistically significant variables. The findings indicated that the proposed model could enhance the predictive power of the SPF and therefore improve the decision-making process since SPFs are used in all parts of the safety management process.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".