MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3142674662 · doi:10.1155/2021/5589075

Unidirectional and Bidirectional LSTM Models for Short-Term Traffic Prediction

2021· article· en· W3142674662 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rusul Abduljabbar, Hussein Dia, Pei‐Wei Tsai

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic Prediction and Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSwinburne University of Technology
KeywordsComputer scienceTerm (time)Artificial neural networkArtificial intelligenceSet (abstract data type)Predictive modellingTraffic flow (computer networking)Data setMachine learningData miningDeep learningTime seriesField (mathematics)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents the development and evaluation of short-term traffic prediction models using unidirectional and bidirectional deep learning long short-term memory (LSTM) neural networks. The unidirectional LSTM (Uni-LSTM) model provides high performance through its ability to recognize longer sequences of traffic time series data. In this work, Uni-LSTM is extended to bidirectional LSTM (BiLSTM) networks which train the input data twice through forward and backward directions. The paper presents a comparative evaluation of the two models for short-term speed and traffic flow prediction using a common dataset of field observations collected from multiple freeways in Australia. The results showed BiLSTM performed better for variable prediction horizons for both speed and flow. Stacked and mixed Uni-LSTM and BiLSTM models were also investigated for 15-minute prediction horizons resulting in improved accuracy when using 4-layer BiLSTM networks. The optimized 4-layer BiLSTM model was then calibrated and validated for multiple prediction horizons using data from three different freeways. The validation results showed a high degree of prediction accuracy exceeding 90% for speeds up to 60-minute prediction horizons. For flow, the model achieved accuracies above 90% for 5- and 10-minute prediction horizons and more than 80% accuracy for 15- and 30-minute prediction horizons. These findings extend the set of AI models available for road operators and provide them with confidence in applying robust models that have been tested and evaluated on different freeways in Australia.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 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

Citations132
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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