MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280524007 · doi:10.1155/2022/2578480

Real-Time Travel Time Prediction Based on Evolving Fuzzy Participatory Learning Model

2022· article· en· W4280524007 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yongyi Li, Ming Zhang, Yixing Ding, Zhenghua Zhou, Ling-Yu Xu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic Prediction and Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersScience and Technology Support Program of Jiangsu ProvinceGovernment of Jiangsu ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsAutoregressive integrated moving averageMean squared errorMean absolute percentage errorIntelligent transportation systemFuzzy logicComputer scienceTraffic congestionEngineeringTime seriesArtificial neural networkArtificial intelligenceMachine learningTransport engineeringStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Urban expressways take on rapid and external transport in the city due to their fast, safe, and large capacity. Implementing intelligent and active traffic control can effectively improve the performance of urban traffic and mitigate the urban traffic congestion problem. Real-time traffic guidance is one critical way of intelligent active traffic control, and travel time is the most important input for real-time traffic guidance. We employed and improved a machine learning method called the evolving fuzzy participatory learning (ePL) model to predict the freeway travel time online in this paper. The ePL model has a promising nonlinear mapping potential, which is well suitable for the traffic prediction. We used generalized recursive least square (GRLS) to improve the estimation accuracy of the model’s parameters. This model is a fuzzy control model. Its output is the forecasting result which is also the fuzzy reasoning result. We tested this model by comparing it to other travel time prediction approaches, with the freeway data from the Caltrans Performance Measurement System. The results from the improved ePL model showed mean absolute error of 5.941 seconds, mean absolute percentage error of 1.316%, and root mean square error of 10.923 s. The performances are better than those of the baseline models including ARIMA and BPN. This model can be used to predict the travel time in the field to be used for active traffic control and traffic guidance.

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 score0.367
Threshold uncertainty score0.525

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 head0.222
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicTraffic Prediction and Management TechniquesFrench-language works237,207