MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3200993033 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2109.08357

Dynamic Spatiotemporal Graph Convolutional Neural Networks for Traffic Data Imputation with Complex Missing Patterns

2021· preprint· en· W3200993033 on OpenAlexaff
Yuebing Liang, Zhan Zhao, Lijun Sun

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic Prediction and Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMissing dataData miningImputation (statistics)GraphDeep learningArtificial intelligenceConvolutional neural networkBig dataIntelligent transportation systemMachine learningTheoretical computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Missing data is an inevitable and ubiquitous problem for traffic data collection in intelligent transportation systems. Despite extensive research regarding traffic data imputation, there still exist two limitations to be addressed: first, existing approaches fail to capture the complex spatiotemporal dependencies in traffic data, especially the dynamic spatial dependencies evolving with time; second, prior studies mainly focus on randomly missing patterns while other more complex missing scenarios are less discussed. To fill these research gaps, we propose a novel deep learning framework called Dynamic Spatiotemporal Graph Convolutional Neural Networks (DSTGCN) to impute missing traffic data. The model combines the recurrent architecture with graph-based convolutions to model the spatiotemporal dependencies. Moreover, we introduce a graph structure estimation technique to model the dynamic spatial dependencies from real-time traffic information and road network structure. Extensive experiments based on two public traffic speed datasets are conducted to compare our proposed model with state-of-the-art deep learning approaches in four types of missing patterns. The results show that our proposed model outperforms existing deep learning models in all kinds of missing scenarios and the graph structure estimation technique contributes to the model performance. We further compare our proposed model with a tensor factorization model and find distinct behaviors across different model families under different training schemes and data availability.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.824
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.135 · 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.

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

Citations20
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicTraffic Prediction and Management TechniquesFrench-language works237,207