MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3208098017 · doi:10.1109/jsen.2021.3124818

Graph-Based Dynamic Modeling and Traffic Prediction of Urban Road Network

2021· article· en· W3208098017 on OpenAlexaff
Tao Liu, Aimin Jiang, Xiaoyu Miao, Yibin Tang, Yanping Zhu, Hon Keung Kwan

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Sensors Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic Prediction and Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsPairwise comparisonComputer scienceAutoregressive modelGraphGraph theoryNetwork topologyIntelligent transportation systemData miningArtificial intelligenceTheoretical computer scienceMathematicsEngineeringTransport engineeringStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Based on various on-road sensor observations, dynamic modeling and analysis of urban road networks becomes an important task of an intelligent transportation system. The major difficulty of this task is that traffic states vary dynamically in both spatial and temporal domains. In this paper, we propose a novel urban road network modeling approach. A road network is described by a weighted undirected graph composed of vertices and edges denoting, respectively, traffic intersections and their pairwise connections. Given the topology of the network, an effective weight estimation algorithm is proposed to extract spatial correlations among adjacent traffic intersections from physical sensor observations. Graph weights can be regularly updated to capture the dynamic essence of traffic states over time. On the basis of weight estimation, we further develop a dynamic spatio-temporal traffic prediction model by using the spatio-temporal autoregressive integrated moving average (STARIMA) model. The effectiveness of the proposed graph-based STARIMA is validated by a series of numerical experiments.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.283
Threshold uncertainty score0.465

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations14
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Sensors JournalSame topicTraffic Prediction and Management TechniquesFrench-language works237,207