MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3126787811 · doi:10.1155/2021/8878011

A Review of Traffic Congestion Prediction Using Artificial Intelligence

2021· review· en· W3126787811 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mahmuda Akhtar, Sara Moridpour

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic Prediction and Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRMIT UniversityAustralian Government
KeywordsTraffic congestionComputer scienceBig dataTraffic congestion reconstruction with Kerner's three-phase theoryArtificial intelligenceFocus (optics)Strengths and weaknessesMachine learningTransport engineeringData miningEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, traffic congestion prediction has led to a growing research area, especially of machine learning of artificial intelligence (AI). With the introduction of big data by stationary sensors or probe vehicle data and the development of new AI models in the last few decades, this research area has expanded extensively. Traffic congestion prediction, especially short-term traffic congestion prediction is made by evaluating different traffic parameters. Most of the researches focus on historical data in forecasting traffic congestion. However, a few articles made real-time traffic congestion prediction. This paper systematically summarises the existing research conducted by applying the various methodologies of AI, notably different machine learning models. The paper accumulates the models under respective branches of AI, and the strength and weaknesses of the models are summarised.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.007
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations280
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicTraffic Prediction and Management TechniquesFrench-language works237,207