MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3189923602 · doi:10.1155/2021/5577179

Subway Sudden Passenger Flow Prediction Method Based on Two Factors: Case Study of the Dongsishitiao Station in Beijing

2021· article· en· W3189923602 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chengguang Xie, Xiaofeng Li, Bingfa Chen, Feng Lin, Yushun Lin, Hainan Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic Prediction and Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBeijingFlow (mathematics)Urban rail transitComputer scienceReliability (semiconductor)SimulationEngineeringTransport engineeringMathematicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A sudden increase in passenger flow can primitively lead to continuous congestion of a subway network and thus have a profound impact on the subway system. To prevent the risk caused by sudden overcrowding, the prediction of passenger flow is a daily task of the rail transit management. Most current short-term passenger flow forecasts rely only on inbound passenger flow, which cannot accurately characterize the total impact of sudden passenger flow. To enhance the prediction accuracy, we propose a sudden passenger flow prediction model with two factors, the outbound and inbound passenger flows. The wavelet neural network (WNN) model was used to detect the sudden passenger flow, and subsequently, it is optimized by the genetic algorithm (GA), according to two-factor data characteristics. Sudden passenger flow events from 2014 to 2016 in the Beijing Dongsishitiao Station (DS) were used to train and verify the reliability of the prediction model. The optimized WNN results proved better than the conventional WNN, and the error of models based on two factors was significantly smaller than the models with a single-factor.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.725
Threshold uncertainty score0.357

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations8
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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