MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224299090 · doi:10.1155/2022/2507107

A Quantitative Method to Delineate the Influence Area of Work Zone Considering Route Choice Inertia and Elastic Demand

2022· article· en· W4224299090 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Guanfeng Wang, Hongfei Jia, Jingjing Tian, Yu Lin, Ruiyi Wu, Zhendong Liu, Heyao Gao

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransportation Planning and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPeople's Government of Jilin Province
KeywordsSubnetworkNode (physics)Computer scienceWork (physics)InertiaTraffic flow (computer networking)Flow networkFlow (mathematics)Mathematical optimizationComputer networkMathematicsEngineeringStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The work zone on the urban road network will affect the surrounding road traffic. To represent the influence area of the work zone, the concept of a subnetwork is proposed in this paper. Delineating a suitable subnetwork quantitatively is a challenging problem. To address this issue, the node synthesized indexes (NSI) are deployed as a variability measure that captures both the change of link flow and origin-destination (OD) demand. The inertia-based stochastic user equilibrium with the elastic demand (ISUEED) model is proposed to accurately provide the data of link flow and OD demand for the network with the work zone. Correspondingly, the data of the network without a work zone can be obtained by the stochastic user equilibrium (SUE) model. According to the value of NSI, the initial range of the subnetwork is determined. Finally, the connectivity and compactness can be guaranteed by the modified L-shell algorithm. To demonstrate the performance of the method, two case studies and sensitivity analyses are conducted based on the Braess network and the local road network in Changchun, China. The proposed method is beneficial to reduce the complexity of the traffic model by substituting the entire network with a subnetwork.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.943
Threshold uncertainty score0.257

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicTransportation Planning and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207