MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2994808218 · doi:10.1002/for.2639

A predictive model of train delays on a railway line

2019· article· en· W2994808218 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

VenueJournal of Forecasting · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRailway Systems and Energy Efficiency
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersDepartment of Science and Technology of Sichuan ProvinceChina Scholarship Council
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial neural networkPython (programming language)Random forestPredictive modellingArtificial intelligenceMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Delay prediction is an important issue associated with train timetabling and dispatching. Based on real‐world operation records, accurate forecasting of delays is of immense significance in train operation and decisions of dispatchers. In this study, we established a model that illustrates the interaction between train delays and their affecting factors via train describer records on a Dutch railway line. Based on the main factors that affect train delay and the time series trend, we determined the independent and dependent variables. A long short‐term memory (LSTM) prediction model in which the actual delay time corresponded to the dependent variable was established via Python. Finally, the prediction accuracy of the random forest model and artificial neural network model was compared. The results indicated that the LSTM model outperformed the other two models.

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 score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.351

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.178 · 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