Use of Topography, Weather Zones, and Semivariogram Parameters to Optimize Road Weather Information System Station Density across Large Spatial Scales
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A road weather information system (RWIS) is a combination of advanced technologies which collect, process, and disseminate road weather and condition information. This information is used by road maintenance authorities to make operative decisions that improve safety and mobility during inclement weather events. Many North American transportation agencies have invested millions of dollars to deploy RWIS stations to improve the monitoring coverage of winter road surface conditions. The design of these networks often varies by region, however, and it is not entirely clear how many stations are necessary to provide adequate monitoring coverage under different conditions; substantial gaps remain in knowledge about optimal design. To fill these gaps, an investigation was conducted to determine how optimized RWIS station densities relate to topographic and weather characteristics. A series of geostatistical semivariogram models were constructed and compared using topographic position index (TPI) and weather severity index (WSI) to measure relative topographic variation and weather severity, respectively. The geostatistical approach was then applied to map the optimum number of RWIS stations across several topographic and weather zones. The study area captured varying environmental characteristics, including regions with flat or varied terrain and warm or cold regions. This study suggests that RWIS data collected from a specific region can be used to estimate the number of stations required for regions with similar zonal characteristics. The outcome of this study can be used as a decision-making tool for RWIS network expansion, thus maximizing monitoring capability of RWIS networks using topographic and weather-related zonal classifications.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".