MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2959691222 · doi:10.3390/su11143822

Applying Machine Learning and Statistical Approaches for Travel Time Estimation in Partial Network Coverage

2019· article· en· W2959691222 on OpenAlexaff
Fahad AlRukaibi, Rushdi Alsaleh, Tarek Sayed

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic Prediction and Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersKuwait University
KeywordsVisSimArtificial neural networkComputer scienceStatistical modelMicrosimulationArtificial intelligenceRandom forestMachine learningSimulationData miningEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study is to estimate the real time travel times on urban networks that are partially covered by moving sensors. The study proposes two machine learning approaches; the random forest (RF) model and the multi-layer feed forward neural network (MFFN) to estimate travel times on urban networks which are partially covered by moving sensors. A MFFN network with three hidden layers was developed and trained using the back-propagation learning algorithm, and the neural weights were optimized using the Levenberg–Marquardt optimization technique. A case study of an urban network with 100 links is considered in this study. The performance of the proposed models was compared to a statistical model, which uses the empirical Bayes (EB) method and the spatial correlation between travel times. The models’ performances were evaluated using data generated from VISSIM microsimulation model. Results show that the machine learning algorithms, e.g., RF and ANN, achieve average improvements of about 4.1% and 2.9% compared with the statistical approach. The RF, MFFN, and the statistical approach models correctly predict real time travel times with estimation accuracies reaching 90.7%, 89.5%, and 86.6% respectively. Moreover, results show that at low moving sensor penetration rate, the RF and MFFN achieve higher estimation accuracy compared with the statistical approach. At probe penetration rate of 1%, the RF, MFFN, and the statistical approach models correctly predict real time travel times with estimation accuracy of 85.6%, 84.4%, and 80.9% respectively. Furthermore, the study investigated the impact of the probe penetration rate on real time neighbor links coverage. Results show that at probe penetration rates of 1%, 3%, and 5%, the models cover the estimation of real time travel times on 73.8%, 94.8%, and 97.2% of the estimation intervals.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.940
Threshold uncertainty score0.379

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations14
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicTraffic Prediction and Management TechniquesFrench-language works237,207