MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4223965771 · doi:10.1061/jtepbs.0000656

Development of a Knowledge Base for Multiyear Infrastructure Planning for Connected and Automated Vehicles

2022· article· en· W4223965771 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Transportation Engineering Part A Systems · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic control and management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCritical infrastructurePlan (archaeology)SAFERInfrastructure planningPublic infrastructureIntersection (aeronautics)Transportation infrastructureComputer scienceTransport infrastructureIdentification (biology)Transport engineeringProcess managementTransportation planningRisk analysis (engineering)BusinessComputer securityEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Connected and automated vehicles (CAVs) require proper infrastructure for safer and more reliable operations. Many state and local planning agencies have developed multiyear capital programs to provide such infrastructure in a timely manner within their limited budgets. Meanwhile, the traffic environment will evolve over time as CAV technologies become available (i.e., toward the mixed environment of CAVs and human-driven vehicles), which requires infrastructure plans specific to different planning terms (i.e., short-, medium-, and long-term) to accommodate changing infrastructure needs. To develop an effective multiyear infrastructure plan, planning agencies need to understand changing infrastructure needs with time, identify alternative infrastructure options for different planning terms, and select the most appropriate ones based on their long-term vision. This study performed a systematic literature review to develop a knowledge base for multiyear infrastructure planning for CAVs. To be more specific, the literature review aims to develop the following knowledge areas: (1) identification of existing and future infrastructure options for the operation of CAVs, (2) understanding the role of infrastructure to support different functions of CAVs to realize safety, mobility, and environmental benefits, and (3) integration of the aforementioned findings into planning agencies’ multiyear infrastructure plans for CAVs. Based on the review, this study categorizes different CAV infrastructure into existing infrastructure and future infrastructure options while considering five system functions of CAVs (i.e., cooperative merging, platooning, intersection movement, dynamic routing, and cooperation and connected functions) to illustrate the role of these infrastructure options under different traffic scenarios. The implementation of the developed knowledge base is demonstrated through a case study of two selected state agencies’ long-term infrastructure planning for CAVs.

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 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 score0.155
Threshold uncertainty score0.406

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 head0.215
Teacher spread0.205 · 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