Short-Term Traffic Flow Prediction: A Method of Combined Deep Learnings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Short-term traffic flow prediction can provide a basis for traffic management and support for travelers to make decisions. Accurate short-term traffic flow prediction also provides necessary conditions for the sustainable development of the traffic environment. Although the application of deep learning methods for traffic flow prediction has achieved good accuracy, the problem of combining multiple deep learning methods to improve the prediction accuracy of a single method still has a margin for in-depth research. In this article, a combined deep learning prediction (CDLP) model including two paralleled single deep learning models, CNN-LSTM-attention model and CNN-GRU-attention model, is established. In the model, a one-dimensional convolutional neural network (1DCNN) is used to extract traffic flow local trend features and RNN variants (LSTM and GRU) with attention mechanism are used to extract long temporal dependencies trend features. Moreover, a dynamic optimal weighted coefficient algorithm (DOWCA) is proposed to calculate the dynamic weights of CNN-LSTM-attention and CNN-GRU-attention with the goal of minimizing the sum of squared errors of the CDLP model. Then, the neuron number, loss function, optimization algorithm, and other parameters of the CDLP model are discussed and set through experiments. Finally, the training set and test set for the CDLP model are established through the processing of traffic flow data collected from the field. The CDLP model is trained and tested, and the prediction results of traffic flow are obtained and analyzed. It indicates that the CDLP model can fit the change trend of traffic flow very well and has better performance. Furthermore, under the same dataset, the results from the CDLP model are compared with baseline models. It is found that the CDLP model has higher prediction accuracy than baseline 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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".