Machine learning-based multi-target regression to effectively predict turning movements at signalized intersections
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Effective prediction of turning movement counts at intersections through efficient and accurate methods is essential and needed for various applications. Commonly predictive methods require extensive data collection, calibration, and modeling efforts to estimate turning movements. In this study, three models were proposed to estimate turning movements at signalized intersections using approach volumes. Two sets of data from the United States and Canada were obtained to develop and test the proposed models. Machine learning-based regression models, including random forest regressor (RFR) and multioutput regressor (MOR) in addition to an artificial neural network (ANN) model, were developed and trained to analyze the relationship between approach volumes and corresponding turning movements. Multiple evaluation measurements were utilized to compare the models. All models produced satisfactory results. The RFR regression model outperformed the MOR model. However, the ANN model had the best performance when compared to the other models. The proposed models provide traffic engineers and planners with reliable and fast methods to estimate turning movements.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it