Travel-To-School Mode Choice Modelling Employing Artificial Intelligence Techniques: A Comparative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many techniques including logistic regression and artificial intelligence have been employed to explain school-goers mode choice behavior. This paper aims to compare the effectiveness, robustness, and convergence of three different machine learning tools (MLT), namely the extreme learning machine (ELM), support vector machine (SVM), and multi-layer perceptron neural network (MLP-NN) to predict school-goers mode choice behavior in Al-Khobar and Dhahran cities of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). It uses the students’ information, including the school grade, the distance between home and school, travel time, family income and size, number of students in the family and education level of parents as input variables to the MLT. However, their outputs were binary, that is, either to choose the passenger car or walking to the school. The study examined a promising performance of the ELM and MLP-NN suggesting their significance as alternatives for school-goers mode choice modeling. The performances of the SVM was satisfactory but not to the same level of significance in comparison with the other two. Moreover, the SVM technique is computationally more expensive over the ELM and MLP-NN. Further, this research develops a majority voting ensemble method based on the outputs of the employed MLT to enhance the overall prediction performance. The presented results confirm the efficacy and superiority of the ensemble method over the others. The study results are likely to guide the transport engineers, planners, and decision-makers by providing them with a reliable way to model and predict the traffic demand for transport infrastructures on the basis of the prevailing mode choice behavior.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".