Extracting Overtaking Segments by Unsupervised Clustering and Predicting Nonmotorized Vehicle’s Trajectory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interpretation of flexible cycling behavior has always been a tough task. It is meaningful to understand the overtaking behavior of cyclists for its threats to safety and its high frequency on shared roads. Advanced unsupervised nonparametric clustering methods are compared to distinguish the overtaking segments from the whole trajectory based on the cycling characteristics of nonmotorized two-wheelers, while the hierarchical Dirichlet process hidden Markov model (HDPHMM) outperforms the mixture model via the Dirichlet process (DP mixture model) and topic model via the hierarchical Dirichlet process (HDP topic model). HDPHMM clusters each record into different states and results in more continuous segments. Based on marked vehicle types, which state of clustering model represents the overtaking condition is deduced. The overtaking segments resulted from HDPHMM show the highest homogeneity in cycling features with actual overtaking behavior. Another practical task is to predict the overtaking trajectory and respond to overtaking behavior in advance. Comparing original trajectory and subdivided trajectory, it is found that training model with grouped data, which have homogeneous features, can improve prediction accuracy. With enough trainable samples, CNN + LSTM hybrid structure can achieve trajectory prediction with a mean absolute error of 3 cm. The segmentation produces trajectory segments with similar characteristics. The model is trained with overtaking trajectory segments. With tens of times less trainable data, the prediction on overtaking trajectory still keeps a mean absolute error of about 5 cm. Subdividing trajectory into segments with homogeneous features can improve the prediction accuracy and reduce the requirement of trainable data volume.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".